#in tandem with this is the idea that the more people reject someone’s authority as ‘inherent’ the harder people are to control | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

scripttorture · 5 years

Note

H! Do you know of any survivor accounts that focus on recovery? A big part of the story I'm writing happens after the main character is rescued from torture, and I want to make sure I don't downplay the effect it had on him and portray his recovery realistically. I'm mainly interested in a timeframe for reintegration/being able to go back to a "normal" life. If it's relevant, he is imprisoned and tortured (mostly beatings, stress positions, starvation and sleep deprivation) for about a month.

I’m sorry this one took so long. My best guess (and it is a guess) is somewhere in the range of 3-10 years. The rest of the answer goes into my reasoning, factors that typically effect recovery and things I’ve found helpful when I’m trying to write this sort of plot.

From the sounds of it I think the most useful thing would be someone’s diary, but I don’t think there is actually a published diary covering the period immediately after a survivor was released for months and years afterwards.

Survivor’s accounts often talk about recovery but- the thing is that isn’t usually why they make their experiences public so that often doesn’t end up being the focus.

Alleg talks about recovery but his aim in publishing his memoirs was demanding the French authorities stopped torturing people in Algeria. Similarly people like ‘Donny the Punk’ Donaldson and Nadia Murad Basee Taha talked about their experiences to highlight abuses that were taking place on a wide scale.

And that is often the reason people make their experiences public: to raise awareness, to draw attention, to demand change.

By its nature that kind of discussion tends to make recovery secondary.

It’s also worth noting that most survivors write about what happened to them a significant period of time after it actually happened. I believe there are some Inquisition era diaries that recount the period a victim was held for, but they’re rare and I think most of the authors were killed.

Monroe is interested in recovery but it’s recovery in a rather broader sense. It’s less about what people can do when and instead about the more nebulous idea of holding on to humanity and being able to have faith in other people. Her focus is war but this isn’t the sole focus of the book.

I do recommend her book, A Darkling Plain, generally. It’s most constructed of interviews her students took. Their instructions were to find someone who had lived through- Monroe calls it ‘political upheaval’, which sounds like a euphemism when she goes on to list war, genocide, violent revolution and oppressive regimes as her examples. The students were taught Institutional Review Board procedures and interviewed a survivor about their experience.

One of the things I think is… enlightening about the approach is that emphasises how close we all are to survivors. We all know someone even if we don’t know the details of what they lived through. I think it’s easy to forget that sometimes.

The interviews are very much led by the survivors. They’re generally looking back on experiences that happened years or decades ago. They go into how an experience changed the survivor, how it effected their outlook on life and whether/how they moved on.

I believe you’d find it helpful but I don’t think it necessarily answers the more precise questions that effect writing. When someone could return to a job, when someone might be ready for a relationship, how they’d interact in the community.

Based on modern accounts of the living conditions survivors find themselves in- I think the question of when people can comfortably do things is difficult because survivors are often put in a position where they’re either forced to do something before they’re comfortable with it or they’re actively prevented from doing it when they want to.

Let me try to explain that with an example. A lot of survivors now are in refugee camps. A person’s ability to find work will vary depending on the camp, the country and the individual’s legal status.

In some situations people in the camps are given very little support. In which case if the survivor doesn’t find some kind of work they might end up starving. In other situations a survivor’s immigration status might mean it’s illegal for them to work. Earning a wage can also be used as a reason to cut charitable or governmental support. Which can be a problem if the survivor is only capable of working occasionally and needs a steady source of income to keep them alive between the periods where they can work.

The environment these people are in can force them into work when it isn’t healthy for them or it can prevent them from working when having a job would help.

Environmental factors like these can obscure individual choice.

Generally I’d encourage you to think about environmental factors and how they could effect the character’s recovery. Survivor’s still have bills to pay and they might be surrounded by people who think working or going back to a mainstream school/university would be ‘good for them’.

Taking away environmental pressures there’s still a question of the character’s drive and motivation. A lot of people want to go back to doing things that are important to them. They want to recapture a sense of normality.

A character who feels very strongly about their job and is highly dedicated is more likely to be back at work quickly whether that is healthy for them or not. A medic who has built their identity around helping others is much more likely to be back at work after three months then someone who doesn’t identify with their job.

This does not necessarily mean the medic would be doing a good job or should be back at work. People do have a tendency to throw themselves back into tasks they identify strongly with.

With work there’s also, potentially, an aspect of physical recovery to consider. A character who has survived a suspension torture, with the resulting nerve damage, may not be able to go back to being a pianist. At least not without a considerable period of time adapting to their disability.

Even if a character is still able to do their job without adaptions and feels strongly about it they probably won’t be up to handling much stress or their previous workload. This does not necessarily stop people from trying.

Whether a character identifies strongly with their job or not they might feel they ‘should’ be doing some form of work. And work has the potential to be extremely helpful during a mental health crisis. It can provide routine, a reason to get up when that feels impossible. A point of stability and a place of relative safety.

Of course the flip side is it can also become a huge source of additional stress and pressure. Which it is depends on the job, the survivor, the working environment, the support (or not) of colleagues and the adaptions in place to support the survivor.

Reintegrating into the community is also complicated by factors that have very little to do with the survivor character or their symptoms.

A lot of communities reject survivors. Child soldiers and victims of rape (especially if it resulted in pregnancy) are often portrayed as traitors who have taken the ‘side’ of their abuser.

This can apply to torture survivors too. If the dominant culture sees torture as a way of obtaining accurate information (this isn’t possible) then the assumption is often that the survivor must have ‘betrayed’ the community. People also tend to assume that if someone was arrested or otherwise targetted for torture they must have been guilty of something.

If the survivor was subjected to ‘clean’ (non-scarring) tortures then- well then people usually assume that the survivor is lying and they weren’t tortured. From the sounds of things all the tortures your character survives are clean.

These factors often work in tandem and make it impossible for survivors to feel welcome in their community. That isolation and lack of support has a huge negative effect on recovery. And because it’s so rare that survivors don’t have to deal with these additional stressors it’s difficult to estimate what recovery looks like without them.

Anecdotally a lot of survivors report that support from their families and from religious institutions was incredibly important to them.

I feel like a lot of this comes down to what a ‘normal’ life means.

Because life for this character probably wouldn’t be quite like it was before. But that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t look normal.

Perhaps he wouldn’t be able to cope with the stress, pressure or uncertainty of his previous job. But that doesn’t mean he couldn’t work. Perhaps he’d struggle to do things he previously enjoyed, but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t find other hobbies.

I’m sorry that I can’t provide an accurate, statistically supported timeframe. I hope that I can describe a helpful way of approaching the problem as a writer-

It’s unlikely that the character will be able to fix everything at once. He might be able to get a ‘normal’ working routine before he has a ‘normal’ social life, for instance. Or vice versa. I’d suggest splitting up the different aspects of his life that have been effected and thinking about them separately.

You can categorise things in a way that makes the most sense for you. I’m outlining the way I would do it as an example, but if my categories don’t make sense for your story then add or remove things as you see fit.

I’d split it up into: Work, Social life, Family life, Romantic/Sexual relationships (if applicable), Communal life and Ritual (ie engagement with wider cultural activities, such as religious services, may pole dancing, getting pissed at the solstice or anything else that’s a big event).

I’d try to think about them separately and think about which area is the biggest priority for the character. I’m assuming ‘work’ comes first for the rest of the example because survivors still have bills to pay. I’m also assuming the character has enough support and stability to recover at his own pace; that the environment isn’t pressured and his environment isn’t adversely effecting his recovery.

So I would start with the symptoms and the way they manifest.

If he has anxiety or hypervigilance, what kind of situations set that off? For instance if his symptoms are triggered by crowds and loud noises then he might not be able to work in a popular night club any more.

If his ideas of ‘normal’ and his goals revolve around doing that particular job again then his recovery and returning to work would take longer. It could take several years. If his personality/experience means his goals are more flexible then he might be able to find another career that provides a less triggering environment and includes something he liked about his previous job. In that case he might be working regularly again in six months or so. Possibly less.

That could then provide enough stability/routine to let him find a balance in other areas of his life.

If he has insomnia then trying to fit his life into a regular 9-5 schedule might be more stressful then it’s worth. Finding work that lets him be flexible about when he comes in, working from home or part time or free lance- could mean a speedier return to something like ‘normal’.

Once I have some ideas about one aspect I’d take a look at the others and the wider plot. I’d think about whether there’s anything going on in the other categories, the plot or with the other characters that could impact on the survivor’s recovery.

When I’m looking across the different categories I’m also on the look out for ways I can use them to feed back into the plot.

So, if I stick with the night club example, perhaps this character has now started a job at a recording studio because this lets him indulge a passion for music with less crowds. And may be I can use that change in environment to introduce him to other characters. May be Drama at the night club is still effecting him through his social circle. May be working somewhere different means he’s unaware of the Drama and that aspect of the plot is going to take him by surprise.

Stress from the different categories will feed into how he’s doing overall and so will positive things like stability and support. Some of the aspects of the character’s life are likely to look ‘normal’ before others.

My best guess for reasonable time frames based on what I’ve read is something in the region of 3-10 years. But that’s taking everything into account across all those categories.

In the best possible circumstances your character could have one aspect of his life looking normal within a year, possibly even as short a time frame as six months. But that assumes an unusual level of support, financial independence, access to treatment and- the internal flexibility to accept a normal that’s distinct to their pre-torture experience. Which could mean a different job, or a different way of socialising or a different degree of engagement with the community.

Generally- there’s a lot lacking in the environment survivors find themselves in. There’s lack of support from family, friends and wider community, if not outright rejection. There’s a lack of accessible, specialist medical care. There’s a lack of safe housing and financial support.

My impression is that a period of years is closer to reality for most people. But we’re talking about fiction and you can choose to make your world better then the one we inhabit.

This kind of recovery isn’t linear. People do backtrack. Even people who are ‘better’ have bad days. Mostly- it’s about showing slow improvement over time and how frustrating slow improvement can be from the inside.

I hope that helps. :)

Available on Wordpress.

Disclaimer

#realkevinday #tw torture #writing victims #writing recovery #mental health #disability #recovery times #factors that help victims #factors that can make symptoms worse

40 notes · View notes

mgladkikh · 5 years

Text

Technology and Privacy Rights

In recent years, technology has come to the forefront of social life. For many people, old and young alike, technology has become integral and necessary to the daily maintenance of everyday living. It is easy to understand why this is so: technology provides unparalleled comfort and accessibility for relatively little hassle. And yet, an unseen aspect of this lifestyle is that surveillance and monitoring are increasingly intensifying, as are the technologies that extend their reach. This kind of surveillance is responsible for the “BarWatch” program in BC.

What is BarWatch?

BarWatch is a scan-to-enter system largely seen in bars, clubs and some restaurants. While BarWatch was originally intended to combat gang presence, its reach has since stretched to include general rowdyism and related types of uncivil behavior associated with nightclub patrons.

How Does BarWatch Work?

The purpose of BarWatch is to promote safety and security of patrons in licensed establishments; all visitors attempting to enter a participant establishment must present identification for scanning before they can enter. Any patrons that have previously engaged in unlawful or uncivil behavior are flagged at the scanner and prevented from entering the establishment. Participant establishments must warn patrons that they are members of BarWatch by affixing signs at entryways that contain the BarWatch “code of conduct”.

Who Participates in BarWatch?

Participant establishments that operate and own scanning systems subscribe to an open list of banned patrons. Most bans last one year. Once the ban has run out, the problem patron is moved from the open list to a closed list of banned patrons specific to the establishment originating the ban. This is because problem patrons are often banned—either permanently or temporarily beyond a year—from the establishment that originated the ban in addition to being placed on BarWatch. Such closed lists are not available to other participant establishments.

PatronScan is the company that provides the scanning devices and stores the scanned IDs on a private server. Although its privacy policy states that any data gathered is deleted every 24 hours, PatronScan actually deletes information permanently from the server after 90 days in most jurisdictions. The police are the only authority with the right to store any such information beyond the 90 day period.

The local police partner with participant establishments and actively sponsor and support the BarWatch program. This partnership operates similarly to the partnership between law enforcement and businesses under the Inadmissible Patron Program.

What are the Concerns?

According to the BC Civil Liberties Association, BarWatch is a method of screening, surveillance and black-listing that lacks transparency. It is unclear what rules customers must follow in participant establishments and there is no publicly-accessible information/catalogue regarding what information the scanning system collects and where personal data is kept. Moreover, there is no way to appeal a decision to remove someone from an establishment, and it constricts people’s life choices. Quite possibly it also punishes those who have left the criminal lifestyle, become rehabilitated and rejoined mainstream society. It is also rife with opportunities for abusive banning practices, and may have unintended but harmful consequences for minorities, who are profiled and excluded. This is consistent with BarWatch’s commitment to putting “safety before privacy”, which contains the implication that safety must come at the expense of privacy and that the two cannot exist cooperatively and in tandem.

Collection of Data

When the BarWatch program was initially piloted, participant establishments employed the TreoScope ID scanning system to gather personal data from patrons. This system recorded the age, name, gender, expiry date, driver’s license number and photograph of every patron upon entry at any participant establishment. However, in 2009, BC Privacy Commissioner, David Loukidelis, issued a report stating that a Vancouver bar using Treoscope was collecting and retaining too much personal data from patrons.

In his report, Loukidelis submitted that privacy legislation should be viewed in the same light as human rights legislation, in that it seeks to protect and respect the dignity of individuals. He argued that proportionality and reasonableness should properly limit what surveillance is permissible by private and public entities. Loukidelis found that the bar was collecting too much information in relation to deterring violence and preventing under-age patrons from entering. He suggested that perhaps the Treoscope system was less about deterring violence and promoting public safety, and more about creating evidence to be used to defend against a potential lawsuit.

This report brought changes to the BarWatch system: participant establishments switched to the PatronScan system which collects only names, dates of birth and photographs. Despite this, the debate surrounding BarWatch’s legality has continued.

Accessing Information Illegally

One major concern surrounding BarWatch has been police access to the BarWatch database. Although the database (with respect to both open and closed lists) is owned by the participant establishments themselves, police can access it through a court order when dealing with issues of public safety.

In some circumstances, this has worked well: in 2013, a Victoria man was apprehended by police on attempted murder charges after they were granted a warrant to view a BarWatch database. The charges were connected to the man’s behavior in a participant establishment and the database belonged to the club that originated the ban.

In other circumstances, this has worked quite poorly: in 2015, management at Studio Nightclub & Lounge (“Studio”) in Vancouver granted police access to their BarWatch database in the course of a criminal investigation. The BC Supreme Court would later reject the evidence obtained by police from the database because police failed to obtain judicial authorization before requesting that Studio turn over its records from the night in question. The information gathered by police from the database was key to linking the alleged assailant to an act of violence in the Granville Entertainment District. The photographic information (connected to the accused’s name) turned over by Studio along with street surveillance footage taken of the suspect provided the police a reasonably clear picture of the accused’s footsteps on the night in question. According to the defence, this amounted to a breach of privacy and Charter rights. In providing its reasoning, the Court agreed: there was no evidence that Studio had affixed the necessary signage warning patrons about how the information obtained by BarWatch would be used or stored, and that the nature of the information collected by BarWatch afforded the accused a reasonably expectation of privacy. In conclusion, the Court found the accused not guilty because the police had violated the accused’s Charter rights by obtaining data from Studio’s BarWatch without a warrant.

Arguably, this finding may fall into a pattern of police activity that skirts the rule of law for the sake of convenience. Around 2013, a Freedom of Information Request revealed that the Victoria Police were encouraged to use BarWatch to track the movements of a suspicious individual. This is problematic because the BarWatch program is not designed to provide police with opportunities to retrospectively track citizens. When law enforcement engages in this kind of behavior, it raises serious legal and ethical concerns about the failure of public authorities to comply with provincial privacy legislation.

Nothing to Hide Argument

Much of the debate about the legalities of BarWatch seem to stem around the idea that “if you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear”. Notably, this same idea has been used to promote and legitimize the CCTV program practiced across the United Kingdom. Privacy advocates and data security experts alike have described the popularity of this idea as the belief that “the dominant orientation is that mechanisms of surveillance are directed at others”. In other words, most people wrongly assume that surveillance monitoring is not directed at them, but rather at some vaguely-defined societal subset comprised entirely of ill-intentioned delinquents. This suggests a lack of appreciation for the full scope of privacy rights which cannot technically be infringed upon without adequate justification.

In Conclusion

Over the past year, the pro-BarWatch community in Vancouver has unsuccessfully advocated for CCTV on Granville Street. BarWatch Vancouver has also recently announced a partnership with Vancouver Transit authorities to bar individuals who engage in problematic behavior on public transit from entering participant establishments. While police have argued that information would only be passed on from police to BarWatch if the public was at risk, the BC Civil Liberties Association has argued that this sounds “an awful lot like profiling people on transit to give information to a private entity”. This may spell the need for greater oversight over decision-making by BarWatch partners, especially if police are collecting and passing information to private organizations and other police departments for intelligence services. Arguably, if people behave egregiously and violently, there are adequate legal consequences in place to address and curb unwanted behavior without risking function creep. As it stands now, the BarWatch lobby is powerful and may continue to eat away at privacy rights for the foreseeable future.

Further reading:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/legal-advocates-concerned-over-transit-police-partnership-with-barwatch-1.4510588

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/code-of-conduct-granville-strip-1.4662910

https://www.martlet.ca/inside-b-c-s-barwatch-program/

https://www.nanaimo.ca/docs/doing-business/doing-business-with-the-city/bar-watch.pdf

https://vancouvercriminallaw.com/zh/is-information-obtained-from-nightclub-id-scanners-an-unfair-invasion-of-privacy/

https://www.ipc.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/Resources/pbd-surveillance.pdf

https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/op-ed/comment-police-use-of-vehicle-bar-data-misguided-1.39429

0 notes

thesrr · 7 years

Text

My Review on the WWE Royal Rumble

Decided to give my thoughts on the WWE Royal Rumble since this is the first day fully back from Ponycon. So if you haven’t seen it yet, I recommend you do before reading. Or if you’re like me and don’t care for spoilers, go ahead.

NXT TakeOver: San Antonio

To me, the big 4 PPVs don’t start an hour earlier. They start a day earlier with NXT TakeOver. These are like PPVs themselves and sometimes even better than the Big 4. So I’m going to review them alongside the Royal Rumble and treat them all as one big event. Because they are.

Eric Young Vs Tye Dillinger

Been a fan of Eric Young even in TNA. While him winning the world Championship was definitely copying Daniel Bryan, he did deserve it. Nice to see him not do a joke gimmick in the WWE so people new to him can treat him seriously from the start. As for Tye, he has grown on me. To think, only Stonecold and DB were capable of getting one word over and he joins them with “10″.

Nice to see Eric give him one more chance to join. Made it seem he really did want him to join Sanity. But seeing how Tye rejected it was really smart. You can’t disqualify someone for giving back their jacket. If Tye does indeed move to the Main Roster, this is a great completion of his time in NXT. I’m not a fan of heels with minions but I could when done right. And Sanity I felt is done right.

They’re big an intimidating, but they’re not the sole reason Eric Young wins matches. Eric Young is capable of winning his own battles (through underhanded tactics but still on his own). They’re not someone who shows up in the final moments of the match and makes it easy for the heel to win. Overall, an excellent opening to the rest of TakeOver and the Royal Rumble in general.

Samoa Joe in the Audience

If I saw this live, I would have thought “if he’s there, that means he MUST be appearing at the Rumble.” Sadly, I would be wrong.

Roderick Strong Vs Andrade Almas

While I heard of Roderick Strong, I sadly never seen him wrestle outside the WWE. Seeing him has been impressive so far. Andrade Almas I felt was smart to go heel. As a face, he didn’t provide much impact. Especially when he got overshadowed by others coming into NXT. He has been working better as a heel than a face.

The two work really well together. Almas was a fun cocky heel while Strong at times lived up to his name and more by being also pretty agile and quick. Awesome match overall. Both of them would be awesome to see on Raw or Smackdown.

The Authors of Pain Vs DIY

Outside having Paul Ellering as a manager, I don’t see them being a Road Warriors ripoff. I see this more of Paul wanting to be known more than that guy who managed the Road Warriors. He want to be the guy known for managing champions. And unlike the Disciples of Apocalypse, these two definitely have the look of being Tag Team Champions. I just didn’t like how they won the later rounds of the Dusty Rhodes Tournament. Makes them look weak when they really aren’t.

DIY are frikkin impressive alone and together. They were the Match of Round 1 and possibly even the Entire Tournament of the Cruiserweight Classic. And seeing them take on The Revival all those times proved they have what it takes as single competitors or a team. 206, Raw, Smackdown, these two definitely deserve a call up.

The match told a good story. When DIY were in control, they had a strong intensity and excitement. When AoP were in control, they told the story of big men Vs smaller men very well in both having the advantage and losing it. Seeing Tommaso German Suplex both of them one after another was awesome! That double submission being broken was also an awesome spot!

This is how the AoP should have won the Dusty Classic: by just being dominate. Definitely beatable, but still showing they could dominate. I hope these two teams collide again in the future. So far, the current match were superior to the previous. I wonder if this can keep up.

Seth Rollins invades NXT

More evidence that TakeOver is part of the Big 4 Events. While this could have been done in the Royal Rumble, seeing it part of NXT really shows how close NXT is to the Main Stage. Would love to see more of this sometimes. Maybe a special event where some NXT stars take on WWE Main Stage ones. The Revival Vs America Alpha would show why both teams are a must see. Joe Vs Styles in the WWE. Sanity Vs Wyatts. A lot of fun possibilities without the need to call them up.

Asuka Vs Nikki Cross Vs Billie Kay Vs Peyton Royce

Asuka is fun: nuff said. Can’t tell if she is a heel or a face but I love the fact that when she asked for a match that she demanded all of them. I don’t remember much of Nikki prior to being in Sanity, but talk about making a nice change. This new gimmick is very fun.

Billy and Peyton, on the other hand, I’m not a fan of. As I said before, I prefer heels who can do things on their own. Either by being completely dominate like the AoP did or being sneaky on their own like Eric Young or the Miz. These two do it in a way I dislike: unable to do anything themselves unless they have numbers. Take away the numbers and they are not a threat and honestly not worthy of a title shot.

And the opening proved it as the two acted more like scared children than wrestlers. They also ruin Asuka and Nikki face each other. When those two collide, its frikkin fun! Intensity Vs Insanity. But when Billie and Peyton join, it slows it down and they continue to work as a team. Its like you have two high speed cars in a race but they have to stop to allow two kids on a tandem bike to catch up.

I will say the Double Suplex off the Announce Table was a cool spot. And in another positive, unlike Jericho and Owens, the two actually didn’t care who got the pin. As long as they have the belt in their possession. But if they didn’t care who won, why not allow one to pin the other? Most likely because neither one wanted to be the one pinned, so pinning the champion would prove their dominance.

But I am glad Asuka defeated the pair while Nikki was taken out via Double Suplex off Announcer Table to Table. It made sure those two are out of the title hunt because they both failed to defeat her and Nikki can get an actual one on one match in the future.

Bobby Roode Vs Shinsuke Nakamura

All I’ve seen on Shinsuke was what he has shown in the WWE. And the first moment he arrived, I believed he was made to be on the Main Stage of the WWE. It was like Japan wanted to design their version of a WWE Superstar and Shinsuke Nakamura is that final product. He is probably going to have the greatest Wrestlemania Entrance ever in the future.

Bobby Roode I saw a lot in TNA. My first real taste of him turning heel was after the first ever TNA event where the winner of a grueling tournament would face the champion. Bobby Roode won that, only to lose the match at the PPV. That was bad in itself, but it got even worse when James Storm, his partner at the time, WON THE TITLE on TV after that. After that, Roode turned heel and won the title. It would have been so much smarter to just have Roode win it all and then turn heel.

But I blame TNA for that and not Bobby Roode. As part of Beer Money I felt the two had a license to print money. As a heel he was great. And now as NXT, he definitely lives up to his new theme song and is Glorious. Though of his three entrances, this one was weaker than his other two TakeOver entrances. Eight ladies kind of pale in comparison with having an actual choir sing your theme song or descending from above to enter the ring.

It was a fun match until the ending. I do hope it was planned and not a real injury. Would hate to see this take Nakamura out of action. But either way, I am glad to see Bobby Roode as Champion in the WWE. If Shinsuke isn’t injured and this is storyline, I do hope we get to see these two again in the future.

Pre-Show

Now the Day of the PPV. NXT was awesome! But can the WWE Royal Rumble itself live up to that hype? Let’s see with the matches that weren’t officially on the card.

Becky Lynch, Nikki Bella, and Naomi Vs Alexa Bliss, Mickie James, and Natalya

There is a lot of people here. Becky is fun. Nikki has been proving herself. And Naomi’s entrance, I hate to say, is more exciting than her. I like Alexa Bliss. She makes a unique heel. Mickie back in the WWE is fun to see. Thanks to her time on the Independent Circuit and TNA, she still has the chops. So weird that Natalya is a heel. As coach, she had a great face gimmick. Sure, it was humorous but it would have gotten over. Considering Tamina is back to full health, I would have had her be the one to attack Nikki.

First, Mickie definitely needs a new theme song. So use to hearing her theme song being more country thanks to her time in TNA. Second, all these story lines in one match? Maybe just have one of them being the pre-show and the others handled in the next PPV. Third, I wish they had an all women Royal Rumble. With the talk of the Woman’s Revolution, it would be cool to see a Full Rumble dedicated to the Wrestlers themselves.

As for the match itself, that Triple Suplex was a fun spot. Other then that, it was an alright match. Definitely a downgrade after seeing all the TakeOver matches minutes ago. Luckily it wasn’t Mickie or Natalya who were pinned or Becky and Nikki getting the pin. This give Naomi the idea of a singles match at the Elimination Chamber PPV that they have been building up. If Mickie were pinned by Becky or Natalya was pinned by Nikki here, it would have watered down their feuds.

Luke Gallows and Karl Anderson Vs Cesaro and Sheamus

I did enjoy Gallows in the WWE prior to his return. While being Kane was terrible (mostly because of the wig), his time with CM Punk was great. Festus was alright for a gimmick but seeing his real self was much better for him. In TNA, he was in Aces and Eights which I felt was a terrible fraction. Like I said with Billy and Peyton, I hate heels that relies on numbers. And I felt he had the same belief as he left TNA.

Now with Karl Anderson, they became part of the Bullet Club. While I haven’t seen much outside bits in ROH, even I heard of them. And they have been a good team but sadly haven’t gotten the chance to shine until recently. They definitely need a Team Name though. The Club is when they were with AJ Styles (as an allusion to the Bullet Club).

Speaking of teams who could use a Team Name: Cesaro and Sheamus. I frikkin enjoy Cesaro, especially in recent time. He makes a great singles competitor and has a lot of fun matches. And even in this situation, he still provides fun. Sheamus I have no real problem with. As a face or a heel, he does his job the best he can. I just am tired to see these two together, be it a team or against each other. I feel they both need to move on to something different.

I like the idea of two referees out there. It would make annoying finishes harder to pull off legitimately since we get a ref not distracted by a wrestler. Downside is we don’t get to see the teamwork of heels due to the fact they can’t attack the wrestler while their partner in the ring is being pushed away by the ref.

As for the match itself, I barely notice the second referee except a few times. This could have been a regular tag team match. Besides that, it was a better match than the 3 on 3 but still down from AoP Vs DIY. But I am glad to see Gallows and Anderson finally win the Tag Team Titles.

Nia Jax Vs Sasha Banks

Sasha is definitely fun. Shame she never got the chance to shine as Women’s Champion. Instead, we see her continually choke on the PPVs. As for Nia, I always liked powerful women. I was hoping to see Awesome Kong (Kharma) be successful but sadly things were out of everyone’s hands. Nia did a great job during NXT and I hope she gets that treatment I was hoping to see in WWE.

As for the match itself, it felt like a TV match than a PPV match. Makes sense since this is not the PPV. Technically a stomp for Nia to prove her dominance. So if she were to ever actually go for the Women’s Title, she would have steam behind her.

The Royal Rumble PPV

So far, NXT TakeOver was Superior to the Pre-Show. But then again, the Pre-Show is not the PPV itself. So can its four single matches match or surpass the ones on NXT?

Charlotte Flair Vs Bayley

Charlotte is a mix bag for me. When she’s alone, I feel she is a great heel. But when she was with someone (be it her father or Dana Brooke), I feel she is a terrible one. Like I said, I like my heels who can win on their own: be it dominance or using tricks. Those two directly interfere in the finish making it worse for me. Bayley I hoped would win the title here. Her character is fun and her last set of matches on TakeOver were great! I am hoping she would get the same kind of success on the Main Roster as she did in NXT.

For the match itself, it was pretty good. A little botchy in the beginning but some great moves from both of them (like the Back Slide Reversal from Charlotte). Definitely better than the NXT Women’s Match because they didn’t have to drag two others with them. And Charlotte goes for a dominance victory with a Natural Selection to the apron. Shame Bayley lost cleanly, but she was defeated by a strong attack like that and that at least doesn’t lower her rankings in my book.

Kevin Owens Vs Roman Reigns

I haven’t seen Kevin Steen prior to the WWE, but he has been a fun heel in NXT and his feud with John Cena. Sadly, as Universal Champion he has been hampered with being a bad heel due to needing the assistance. Kevin definitely can be a dominate heel and he has in the past. But honestly he has to stop being Besties with Jericho and be the show.

I don’t really have a problem with Roman. I believe he has been pushed too soon. And I can see why people dislike Roman due to all the “shoving him down our throats”. Hopefully he can develop into his own in the future and actually be a face people can get behind.

Why is the Shark Cage above the Ring? If I was Foley and I saw NXT’s attempt, I would have kept it away from the ring to prevent any shenanigans like throwing down brass knuckles like they did. But in this case, it didn’t matter because it was also No-DQ. That kind of makes the entire “Keep Jericho Out of the Match” pointless. Because being above the ring and ready to drop a weapon pretty much means he was still there in the match.

The match itself, being a No-DQ match, was fun to see. Lots of fun spots with the biggest being KO Frog Splash Roman through a Table on the Outside. But one of the spots had me worried and that was Kevin Owens falling down onto the Tower of Chairs. I really hate spots like these because I fear it would seriously injure them or worse. I only recently got over them breaking Ladders after someone revealed those are specifically made of wood.

The biggest downer was Braun Strowman. At the end, he showed up and attacked Roman Reigns. Once again, despite having the opportunity to show his dominance the writers decide to make him win because of others. And even ignoring that, why Strowman? Was he still upset with the Double Spear or the Spear in that Three on Three? If the first, why not attack Goldberg when he came out? This wouldn’t be the last time I question the Storytelling.

Neville Vs Rich Swann

I enjoyed Neville as a face. But now that he is a heel, he has definitely improved character wise. His look and his moves definitely makes the Heel turn legit. Rich Swann is fun and exciting in the ring. I was really hoping he would retain the title. But unlike other matches, I wouldn’t have mind if Neville won. This was a match where either outcome would be a positive for me.

The match was exciting and excellent. Neville is definitely the big star of 205 Live. And to see him win by submission showed that he doesn’t need the Red Arrow or to go off the top. He just wants to to inflict more damage.

John Cena Vs AJ Styles

I have no real problem with Cena. He does a lot for the WWE so he deserves to be their poster boy. AJ Styles definitely lives up to being phenomenal. In TNA, he was the reason you had to watch it. Even after being Mini-Flair, he was still great in the ring. TNA made a grave mistake to letting him go. Seeing him in the WWE so soon had me worried. But eventually in the end he became World Champion, something I never expected.

I am still surprised how well the two work together. I will say that sometimes Cena does heelish tactics. Would this lead to an actual heel turn or is he trying to add some edge? Overall, best singles match of the PPV alone.

The Royal Rumble Event

Possibly the most stacked card ever. And the potential of surprise entrants are numerous. How did it do? Let’s go over it by elimination.

Jack Gallagher - Entry #5

I was hoping to see this guy be one of the competitors. Outside the Neville story line, he was the highlight of 205 Live. Sadly, his time was too short and he was the first one eliminated when #6 entered the match. But for the brief time he was there, he was a joy to watch.

Mojo Rawley - Entry #4

Mojo is a fun guy in a Tag Team and most likely fun at parties. But as a singles competitor he could use work. Honestly, despite winning the Battle Royal to get in, I was hoping he would be the first one gone. But he lasted longer than Jack and that makes me sad.

Big Cass - Entry #1

He’s pretty good for a big guy, but I like him better with Enzo than a solo act. Sadly, we didn’t get to see the two together because he was eliminated right after Mojo.

Kalisto - Entry #3

I was rooting for him to win the Crusierweight for Smackdown. Sadly, his lost means Raw is also after Smackdown. He’s fun but really needs to be with others his own weight class. But man, that is a lot of height for his elimination.

Mark Henry - Entry #6

Like the three before, Mark was also eliminated by Strowman. I grew up watching Henry from his blue tights being an Olympic hero to being a member of the Nation to Sexual Chocolate and everything between. He definitely deserves a Hall of Fame shot in my book.

The Big Show - Entry #9

Big Show looked good. I believe them when they say this is the most fit he has been in some time. But surprisingly he was there pretty short. Another victim of the Strowman Push.

James Ellsworth - Entry #11

I knew he is a joke entry. I have them a bunch of times in my own Rumble. His spot was funny and that was an impressive bump he took when being eliminated. But I think I am done with the joke Ellsworth. How is the real Ellsworth?

Tye Dillinger - Entry #10

Another guy I wanted to see and even in the exact spot I was hoping for. I was hoping he would last a little longer but sadly he was soon eliminated.

Braun Strowman - Entry #7

As I type this, I am watching Raw. It was there that they explained, with a clip I totally forgot, that Kevin Owens promised him a title shot after beating Reigns. And Strowman took that as legit. Amazing how one promo can change the results of a match. As for his elimination, I’ll talk about that more when I get to the person he was eliminated by.

The New Day - Kofi #14, Big E #17, Woods #20

Even though they have been around for a long time, I still enjoy their work. Even Woods with his Up Up Down Down channel on Youtube. But for an event that says “Friend Vs Friend”, there is very little friends going on. In fact, these two practically went out at the exact same time.

Cesaro & Sheamus - Entry #19 and #16

Speaking of which, so did they. That is until the final moments. A funny bit was Cesaro getting dizzy hitting everyone with the Big Swing and almost getting Sheamus. But those final moments saw them going against each other and lead to both of them being gone.

Apollo Crews - Entry #22

I feel sorry for Crews. He is definitely good but he was brought up from NXT way too soon. And his time in the Rumble makes that same suggestion. He should probably go back to NXT and wait before WWE actually have a plan with him.

Dean Ambrose - Entry #12

I don’t mind the comedy bits of Dean. I still enjoy him. I just like the Miz better as IC Champion.

Dolph Ziggler - Entry #24

Ziggler’s chase for the IC title bored me. Besides one time, the Miz always had the upper hand. It is because Miz has a clever use of his wife while Ziggler hits a Glass Ceiling that is invisible. I am glad he turned heel, but in this Rumble you don’t see it.

Enzo Amore - Entry #27

Talk about a quick time. Like Big Cass, I prefer him with Cass than alone. And his time was quick thanks to Lesnar.

Brock Lesnar - Entry #26

I knew Lesnar wasn’t going to win, but I expected him to at least be the one to Eliminate Goldberg to set up that Wrestlemania Final Match. Instead, Goldberg came in and quickly eliminated him. That shocked me.

Rusev - Entry #18

Poor Rusev. He has a lot going for him but things just don’t turn out well for him. At least he lasted longer than others.

Baron Corbin - Entry #13

I wasn’t a fan of him before, even when he turned heel. But he has been growing on me. One thing I wanted to see at Survivor Series 2016 was Strowman Vs Corbin. Of the two, I prefer Corbin. My wish failed because of Shane McMahon. But in this rumble, I finally got to see Baron take on Strowman. And with a little help, Corbin was the one to eliminate him. He lasted pretty long too. Maybe in the future he’ll be a World Champion.

Luke Harper - Entry #25

I am honestly surprised that Luke was the one to betray the Wyatt Family. I swear it was going to be Orton and Harper would prove his loyalty. But if he does decide to go solo, here’s hoping he doesn’t return again to the Wyatt Family.

Goldberg - Entry #28

Goldberg did more in this Rumble than his match against Lesnar. But despite what they set up and planned, I am looking forward to seeing Goldberg Vs The Undertaker than either of those other two matches.

The Miz - Entry #15

I was hoping the Miz would win. He is my current favorite wrestler. In that match, practically everyone who entered hit the Miz with one of their best moves. Speared, F5ed, Chokeslammed... While Jericho lasted longer overall, the Miz was in that ring much longer.

Sami Zayn - Entry #8

Zayn is a fun guy and I’ve seen matches of him outside WWE. I am glad he lasted as long as I did but I was hoping to see him at least in the Final Four. Oh well.

The Undertaker - Entry #29

With Goldberg, Lesnar and the Undertaker entering when they did, I was wondering who would be #30. They wouldn’t have done that unless the surprise of the 30th Entrant was worth it. But honestly, it wasn’t. Especially because that person eliminated the Undertaker to set up a Wrestlemania match.

Chris Jericho - Entry #2

I am a big fan of Jericho. He was the first heel I ever cheered for. And in this Rumble, he surpassed Triple H by lasting almost 5 hours in total. Sadly, he didn’t do much as he spent a good number of time outside.

Bray Wyatt - Entry #21

I enjoy Wyatt. Love his gimmick and his group. While I question the entry of Orton into the fray, it does seem to be working for him. And Final 3 is a great spot to be in.

Roman Reigns - Entry #30

I was upset that Reigns was #30. While the possibility that Joe or Finn would be in the Rumble stung, the real issue was one thing: HOW?!? In story, McMahon hates Reigns. And she was definitely in charge of who enters the Rumble. So how on Earth did she okayed Reigns to enter? So far he hasn’t appeared on Raw so unless he becomes a heel working with the Authority, I don’t like the fact he did enter the Rumble.

Winner: Randy Orton - Entry #23

And our winner is the 7th Two Time Winner. Orton has his ups and down but he seems to be doing well in the Wyatt Family. But now that he won the title, what is gonna happen? Well, we’ll find out when Smackdown is on Tomorrow. I honestly expected him to be the betrayer in this PPV. Looks like I was wrong

Overall

Overall, it was a fun Weekend for Wrestling Fans. TakeOver was awesome and the Rumble was still fun. Now I am looking forward to do my own.

#wwe royal rumble #WWE #WWE NXT #wwe nxt takeover #royal rumble #royal rumble 2017

3 notes · View notes

cthulu-calls · 7 years

Text

Suicide is a force of unthinkable strength and volume at this point in history. It is almost banal. Kids younger than ten carry out this act with a frightening level of success, and many more fail in their attempts. The demography of suicide is presently a very interesting subject - mostly, it represents the general feeling that there is No Alternative. It is the ultimate act of isolated revolt, in its most desperate and atomized form. It is capital's preferred option for those who are discontent, as it leaves the dominant social order intact quietly, while drumming up sympathy for "those poor people" who took their own lives. It does not demand any discussion on why.

The intelligent revolutionary harnesses dominant social trends for their ends. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was one of the first to figure this out, in tandem with Hafez Al-Assad, Bashar's father. They figured it out in a vulgar way - by inducing those who followed them to commit suicidal acts of military and terrorist strategy. Of course neither Khomeini nor Assad was the first to sign up to blow themselves up - Allah had willed a different path for them, surely. Peasants were used as pawns, and to this day, are induced to blow themselves up for the sake of the hierarchies that exploit them and their survivors.

It is obvious that this represents some of the most extreme cases of hierarchies preserving themselves and exploiting their subjects. The anarchist is quite likely, if not practically duty-bound, to reject this. Does this mean that suicide is of no use to us? In my mind, it does not. It simply means that we would do well to approach the matter from the other end.

Presently, resources are not scarce in the postindustrial west. There are homes, there is food, the means exist to produce a brilliant standard of living for nearly all people, were those means in our hands. What is in absolutely short supply, however, is meaning. Our peers who are currently chest-beating and flag-waving their way around the likes of Trump, Brexit, Le Pen, and all variants of the anti-neoliberal, ultra-nationalist ideologies are given a prepackaged set of parameters within which meaning can be produced. If they can't find themselves a job, or a spot in the army, they can at least find themselves a sense of belonging in a hyped-up mob of hyper-emotions like hatred and fear. They can find their views and existences affirmed by the society that already exists - family, labor, positions of power, moral authority, it all stands strong and in such a fashion that the project of continuing to exist seems to be a good idea (for them).

Those who imagine another way of living see no obvious road to it, and as such, there is unbelievable inertia, apathy, depression, and suicidal urges springing up on the left and among anarchists. They do not see the world they imagine - if they are even able to imagine it at all - affirmed anywhere. We have some ideas here on this board, some theories, even some quite reasonable historical analyses pointing us in the direction that seems sound and decent. But these ideas mean very little if they do not appear to be readily practicable or of much consequence.

This puts us on the downward end of a war of meaning and individual self-preservation. Our "post-truth" world is so flaccid, and so without content, that the individual frequently sees the voluntary ending of their own existence to be a more reasonable alternative to resistance, because all forms of resistance heretofore imagined are not, apparently, of much consequence. This is more true of the so-called "liberal left" than of anarchists, but is still generally relevant for most anarchists who are not naive enough to be hopped up on ideology 24/7.

Opposition to violent means is at a low among radicals, yet violent means are notoriously good ways to get killed or imprisoned. Draw a gun at a protest and you will be ended. Organize a militia and you will be kept under the watch and quite possibly framed into imprisonment. Yet do we not see the reality that is in front of us? The nature of violence has changed. Classical combat, even updated to include the likes of guerrilla warfare, is not particularly relevant. Yet force is still the blood of history and power. Now, combat consists of the presence or absence of meaning, and the subsequent affirmation or negation of existence. Does the world around us, in how it is altered by our adversaries strategically, drive us to a place of desperation? (It does). Conversely, could we not begin altering the worlds of our opponents to be just as desperation-inducing? Could we not, on the level of the collective and the individual alike, compose targeted means of driving our enemies to suicide?

This is the realpolitik of conversion. Radicalizing people does not consist of convincing them through reasoned argument. It instead is a matter of examining the nature of a person's desperations, and addressing them by offering meaning. Luckily, unlike material resources, meaning can be created by nothing. This is why Nietzsche, Stirner, and Novatore offer some of the most relevant tendencies within anarchism today. It is also the realpolitik of destabilization. As surely as we create and distribute the means of producing meaning to those we align with, we poetically expose the baseless and empty nature of the meaning our enemies derive from the systems they interact with. If this means the tables turn and they off themselves, this is our enemies killing our enemies for us - far superior to direct violence. If it means they reach a point of desperation, where their resolve is weakened, it may also mean they are radicalized and brought into the anarchist fold, because their old ideas gave way and fell apart (I know more former nazis who became anarchists in this way than you'd imagine).

My last point: What does this look like in practical terms? I think to a certain extent we could brainstorm this in the comments, but my first thoughts are:

We gain a reputation of being the ones who get the most out of life. This means learning to Live Well. We must be seen universally as being the top assemblage of humanity that is eating the best food, having the best sex, creating the best art, and most importantly: having the most fun. Somehow, radicals have gained the opposite reputation, as being joyless guilt-mongers who lead austere and bitter lives, and infighting constantly, living in squalor, and generally having a bad time. We need to ask: What makes us happy? And begin doing that as a group, loudly and in the streets. This might be more important than nearly anything else. If we are seen as an order of existentially brilliant clowns, vagabonds, and intellectual hedonists, we will draw a great deal of interest for that fact alone - while implying that our enemies are boring and sad. Their steady diets of hatred and fear make this easy to imply - because it is true.

The point about fun makes sense only when it is situated in a larger imaginative vision of a better society. Without this element, it becomes little more than a self-righteous iteration of party culture. When we posit a clear vision of how things could be, and we do so in a manner that is accessible and viewed as being potentially close at hand, we succeed in a critical way that we have continuously failed in since 1968 (generally). This means offering visions of how life could be that are not highfalutin', distantly utopian, or explicated in dry academic terms. For all the uses of our theory, it cannot ever exist in a vacuum, nor can it exist without its proponents acting out this theory prefiguratively. This is why fiction, cinema, poetry, and comedy are immensely important. They create culture that has a vision, and that vision is participatory here and now, in a manner that gathers people together, often physically.

Clowning is a great tactic that embodies what I am saying here, I think. The clown, in her foolish attire, fashions herself to be someone who is bound to be rejected and loathed - but this is used to her advantage, to make a mockery of the processes by which individuals are rejected or thought to be fools. She empties herself out publicly in order to attain a strategic position where she can completely cut down and make fun of the world around her without firing a single shot. The suicidal person may at times feel like a sad clown, a misfit who lacks the energy required to laugh at the world that has fashioned him into this sad character. Anarchists can offer a meaning-making culture that converts the wallowing of the misfit, and all its desperation, into a weapon of high enjoyment and utter decimation of our enemies. I am envisioning roving gangs of redneck clowns on freak-bicycles, dressed like sad Rebranded White Nationalism kids, blaring country music, perhaps with pepe masks, riding near conservatives, white supremacists, and Trump supporters on the street, heckling them and mimicking the sad behavior of these people. All of this would be perceived as a joke, with no violent intentions, and inevitably, a violent reaction would be provoked, offering the perfect opportunity to both kick fascist ass (in a pepe mask) and to highlight the weak desperation of our adversaries. Entire societies of dropout clowns could be formed, with the daily intention and sole goal of embarrassing the enemy comedically - and having as much fun as possible while doing it. These clowns could also act as a buffer between police and serious protestors (we've seen some of this before in Occupy and with the Guerrilla Clown Army from Scotland).

There is a lot more to say here on these points and maybe I'll write more about it, but I figured I'd post this here for the sake of maybe provoking some interesting discussion. Not sure what y'all will think. if you read all this, thanks!

- Taken from r/Anarchism, called Suicide, Desperation, and Clowns

1 note · View note

jillmckenzie1 · 5 years

Text

Interview with Colorado Prize for Poetry Winner: Gillian Cummings

Gillian Cummings is the Author of The Owl was a Baker’s Daughter, winner of the 2018 Colorado Prize for Poetry selected by John Yau, forthcoming this November from The Center for Literary Publishing at Colorado State University. I reached out to Gillian Cummings directly regarding her success, and she enthusiastically consented to an interview.

About The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter:

The title The Owl was a Baker’s Daughter originates from a line spoken by Shakespeare’s Ophelia in Hamlet whose grief and guilt at which point have overwhelmed her into a sort of psychosis. The Owl was a Baker’s Daughter harkens to a disempowered, grief-struck tragic female figure and muse. In four parts, the fragile narrator grapples with her own deteriorating mental state in a way that is both liquidly lyrical and powerfully melancholy to behold. Each poem offers an evocative examination of and attempted liberation from depression through several interwoven, extended and stunning nature representations. Water is invoked during many of these pleading pieces, an eerie foreshadowing of her death by drowning: “The speech of rain: it was only a matter / of something asking to be let in.” The Owl was a Baker’s Daughter follows the profoundly wounded interior workings of a devastated, deranged character from her psychotic breaking point to that final point of departure—her suicide.

About the Poet:

Gillian Cummings is the author of The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter, winner of the 2018 Colorado Prize for Poetry and My Dim Aviary, winner of the 2015 Hudson Prize (Black Lawrence Press, 2016). She has also written three chapbooks. Her poems have appeared in Barrow Street, Boulevard, The Cincinnati Review, the Colorado Review, Denver Quarterly, The Journal, The New Orleans Review, Verse Daily, in other journals and in two anthologies.

Here’s just a glimpse into the work:

Unwriting the Sentence

Nightly, it flaps out, flaps out— not a cry but a quietness, it had become bigger, empty of starlight. Sleep tucked it far beneath a bed of wings and smoke-moon, beneath the room rocking a slow tug at her boatlessness. It would come for her. Mornings, she knew this better than curtains know to keep out light. She once feared this would be more than she would ever know: the book of pages left unturned, sullied with some phantom coffee stains, underlines, mostly the erasures. It was the erasures. In the end, it was the erasures of love that hurt most.

The owl was a baker’s daughter

If earth is oven enough for my father’s body, I won’t eat a cake that flies. No, no, no—but night hears Who? as a question and cherry pies come out feathered in silvers, golds. Brown at the throat where words turned to molten syrup under crust—whose edges? Who? Where do we end? Ah, stir us with no spoon but a knife, dirt is all our company. Would I were the moon. Misted over and round as a chipped china plate. It’s late to dine but too early for worms, so let me shine eerily upon you. I’ll enter the hall quietly, slippered, my body gossamered white.

Moon-Girls of the Medicine

You were about to float away so they taught you not to. Softly into quiet they come, finely, into spooked light—winged ones they bring, goldfinch, marlin, wren in enormous nest: the begin again, spring to startle your winter out of sleep’s either you’ll wake to wind that washes you like song or you’ll open eyes on sky untrumpeted in old tempests of stars; either you’ll come back to your body or you won’t. But the girls hover over you with their grass- messes of hair, their eyes mercy-mild, and what the birds teach in such communal twig- tangle is simple: how alone, we break; how we’re saved by one another.

Gillian Cummings, “Unwriting the Sentence,” “The owl was a baker’s daughter,” and “Moon-Girls of the Medicine” from The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter, published by THE CENTER FOR LITERARY PUBLISHING. Copyright © 2018 by Gillian Cummings. Reprinted by permission of THE CENTER FOR LITERARY PUBLISHING.

How does the Ophelia portrayed in this work relate to Shakespeare’s? Is a reader’s grasp of the Shakespearean backstory essential to understanding this work?

That’s a good question. All of the poems, from beginning to end, take as their subject the topic of suicide, suicidal ideation, and the life that can come back to one after an experience of coma, though of course Ophelia dies in Hamlet, as she also dies in this book.

This book is divided into four sections, the first and third sections being made up of short poems that were once all sonnets, and the second and fourth sections being taken from a sequence of prose poems I expressly wrote in a voice I imagined to be Ophelia’s. I think the poems that I will call for convenience the “once-sonnets” are easier for the reader to approach than the twelve prose poems, because they came out of my direct experience as someone who lived for over six years with suicidal depression.

The prose poems that take on the persona of Ophelia, these are a little different. In writing them, I read Hamlet over and over, I’d say about fifteen times. I wanted those poems to sound like Ophelia’s voice as Shakespeare had expressed it, only prismed through the crystal of a woman’s (my) consciousness. I think that with the prose poems, the reader may be able to experience the mind of a woman from the past who has experienced a profound and profoundly disturbing loss (Hamlet’s odd and often cruel behavior towards her that turns to an outright rejection of her love and then his mistaken murder of her father). But honestly, I do leave out the backstory, the scaffolding, so to speak, that is Shakespeare’s play. I let the reader imagine exactly what is going on, in part because I do want the experience to be disorienting, to feel like madness.

After the express privilege of reading your work, Keats’ idea of the chameleon poet, one that “has no identity, [who] is continually filling some other body” came to mind. In this work, that “other body” seems to be Ophelia. How does this process of distance from self-affect the writing process? How would you describe your own overall aesthetic?

I think that John Yau, who judged the Colorado Prize, had that same experience from reading these poems, that in my writing I inhabit other selves. And it’s true. It’s very hard for me to write as an “I.” It’s hard to even say “I,” if the “I” is really myself. So, I have developed a habit of speaking in persona poems or of writing as myself but using the pronoun “she” or “you” to create a necessary distance. I also make things up, fictionalize my life in poems, to further that distance. I think that there are some poems in this book that are so intensely personal that they still frighten me when I read them. One is the poem “Unwriting the Sentence.” I wrote that poem when I was very, very close to taking my life. It is my “Edge” poem and even quotes Plath. I tried to make it very, very quiet, eerily so. I think I may do these kinds of things in my writing because in life I’m a very shy person with a need for privacy in an increasingly publicly oriented society. And my mind may be more fractured than a normal person’s.

In tandem, Keats’ idea of negative capability, or “the artist’s access to truth without the pressure and framework of logic or science” feels simultaneously relevant. Through poetry and prose that evade straightforward sense, Ophelia’s voice proffers its own bent wisdom. How would you say this concept affects the reading experience of The Owl was a Baker’s Daughter and the reception of its inner logic?

As I said, I think that in the writing of this book, I was trying to create an experience for the reader that resembles the disorientation of madness. I hope that that comes across. I was also, in the third section of the book, the section that is more a coming back to life, trying to ground the poems in a deeply felt appreciation of the natural world, what remains of it, as a source of healing, a balm to the disturbed mind. I like your phrase “bent wisdom.” In The Owl, I lean upon and try to learn from certain Buddhist sutras that I incorporate obliquely. I never quite understood how to live the wisdom of Zen, though I studied under a Buddhist teacher for six years and took the Zen precepts called “Jukai” at the same time that I was starting to fall apart from several unbearably sad rifts in my life. Ophelia, as I saw and still see her, was inordinately wise in her madness, and the things Shakespeare had her say when she lost hold of her senses seemed to challenge even the patriarchal authority of King Claudius. I love that. And I love the beauty of her lack of logic. It’s “bent wisdom.” But it’s not so much my own as it is Shakespeare’s.

Your work My Dim Aviary (Black Lawrence Press, 2016), inhabits the voice of Miss Fernande—a Parisian model, prostitute, rumored mistress of Picasso. Observing the parallel explorations of the Damsel in Distress archetype, what draws you towards these subject matters and their musings?

The reasons for choosing both of these women as subjects may just come out of my life experience as someone who has a hard time seeing the side of life that is not tragic. I wrote in the voice of a sex-worker from a time past in My Dim Aviary because it was a way of my trying to heal myself from sexual abuse I suffered when I was young. I am someone who does not like sex and I thought that if I could imagine myself as someone comfortable in a very sexualized and even commodified body, I could face this terrible fear I have of not being safe as a woman. Sadly, for me, writing that first book did not help me at all with this problem. Nothing has so far… And then with the poems about Ophelia: I think she came so easily to mind simply because at the time I was obsessed with suicide, and she has long been one of my favorite Shakespeare characters.

One of the simplest ways people can promote poetry is by highly recommending other works. With that in mind, what poetry are you currently reading? Are there any poets, dead or alive, who you credit as your influences?

Thank you for asking this question. Certain poets’ works were central to the writing of this book, namely those of Cynthia Cruz, Allison Benis White, and Chloe Honum, who have written with great restraint about extreme states, not necessarily always their own. Also, Sylvia Plath, whose poetry has long been a touchstone for me, and Emily Dickinson. In recent years, I have loved—though not for that same kind of subject matter—Carolina Ebeid’s You Ask Me to Talk about the Interior, Ocean Vuong’s Night Sky with Exit Wounds, Jennifer Chang’s Some Say the Lark, and Kaveh Akbar’s Calling a Wolf a Wolf. There really are too many poets to name—I could go on and on. Most recently, I have turned to reading the Polish poets of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, because I’m now working on a novel that takes place, partially, in Poland. And to speak of novels, not poetry, I feel a great debt to Virginia Woolf, who is always a great teacher for me.

When and where can one purchase your work?

The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter has a release date of November 15, 2018. But it just went live for pre-sale orders.

It’s available through The University Press of Colorado’s website: https://upcolorado.com/university-press-of-colorado/item/3522-the-owl-was-a-baker-s-daughter.

And it’s also available through Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Bakers-Daughter-Colorado-Prize-Poetry/dp/1885635656/

And, of course, you can order it at your local independent bookstore.

from Blog https://ondenver.com/interview-with-colorado-book-award-winner-gillian-cummings/

0 notes

foursproutwealth-blog · 6 years

Text

The Future Is What We Make Of It - Part 2

New Post has been published on http://foursprout.com/wealth/the-future-is-what-we-make-of-it-part-2/

The Future Is What We Make Of It - Part 2

Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

I want to really think differently than the very consistent liberal-media line of, Well if they just knew better they would vote differently. They’re under-informed, they’re under-educated. I think it really misunderstands something, which is that, just because people are not acting rationally in accordance with what you think is rational, doesn’t mean that they’re not acting rationally. And I think there’s perfectly rational voter behavior in voting for Trump. For economic reasons and social reasons.

Life is getting worse. You are less comfortable in your own house, in your own town, in your own skin. Your outlook for the future is worse with every passing year. And you conscientiously voted for people through this entire time. So it is actually an established fact that the system did not work for you. This representative democracy thing. And so you go and lob a grenade at it, when the grenade becomes available. And that is rational.

– From the excellent interview of Masha Gessen via The Atlantic

In yesterday’s post, I discussed the future opportunity and danger presented by that large mass of the American public that self-identifies as part of “the resistance.” Before I continue, we should revisit a few of the key points made. For example:

With Trump’s election, the mask is finally off. Even Trump supporters admit that his election was a reaction to how corrupt and fraudulent our economy and society had become during the 21st century — first under Bush and then Obama. Independents such as myself, despite finding Trump revolting and dangerous, tend to agree with this assessment.

The only significant group of people who simply refuse to admit this fact are those who proudly proclaim themselves to be part of “the resistance.” Many of them thought everything was going just fine for the country while Obama was President simply because things were going well for them, which is just human nature. If things are going fine for you on a individual level, there isn’t much incentive to peek behind the curtain and question what’s really going on. You’re simply too busy feeling good about yourself and focusing on getting ahead. I know because I’ve been there.

Also this:

It’s tempting to just write these people off as useful idiots being easily corralled into the vicious arms of neocons and deep state psychopaths following the emotional trauma inflicted upon their psyche by the election of Donald Trump. It’s tempting to do that, because in many ways that’s a fairly accurate description of what’s going on, but I want to try to be less judgmental right now. When thinking back to the early days of my awakening, I remember how malleable my mind was to all sorts of influences, both positive and negative. This is what happens to people when your entire worldview is suddenly shattered or disrupted. Human nature is to look for an alternative narrative that can help you once again make sense of the world. Unfortunately for most card-carrying members of “the resistance,” nefarious characters within corporate media and U.S. intelligence agencies were ready with a comforting narrative which gave them permission to avoid confronting reality: Russia did it.

We should not write off our fellow humans simply because they voted for Trump, or because they foolishly embraced some delusional conspiracy which blames Russia for everything. There are tens of millions of very decent people within both these groups who genuinely care about the country and making things better. We must never forget that convincing one group of voters to hate and dehumanize another group of voters serves the interests of the power structure and no one else. People have been successfully manipulated into thinking that their fellow citizens with essentially zero power are the real enemy as opposed to the oligarchs who actually destroyed and pillaged the country. This is why I focus pretty much all my posts on the bigger picture and direct my energy to calling out those with actual power. If you spend your entire day fuming about how stupid Trump voters are, or how “the resistance” are just a bunch of brainwashed useful idiots, you’re being intentionally played by those who’re really in power.

As discussed yesterday, Trump’s election caused a mental breakdown across a wide swath of the U.S. population. This happened because millions upon millions of people thought things were going just fine under Obama, simply because things were going fine for them. The corporate media and discredited neocons/neoliberals working in tandem with U.S. intelligence agencies immediately saw this crisis for the opportunity it was. They could present themselves as leaders of “the resistance” and blame Trump’s rise on Russia. This way demoralized, yet financially successful, Hillary Clinton voters could continue to tell themselves the same comforting tale that everything’s inherently fine in this country were it not for Russia. You couldn’t come up with a more perfect narrative for the rejected status quo to use in order to reestablish its authority if you tried. Unfortunately, it’s largely worked thus far.

Sounds depressing, I know. Nevertheless, just because it’s worked so far, doesn’t mean it’ll work forever. One of the key points I highlighted in yesterday’s piece is that people are very vulnerable to manipulation and bad ideas in the immediate aftermath of any trauma that comes with one’s worldview being shattered. People tend to look for grand enemies in the face of such distress, whether that be the Rothschilds, the Illuminati or Vladimir Putin. It’s all the same in the end. This isn’t to say I deny the existence of extremely rich and powerful people in the world who wield tremendous influence in world affairs, I certainly think there are. Rather, it’s to say that human beings often times get so caught up on grand conspiracy theories they do nothing to change the world around them. This leads them to just sit around shivering in fear warning everyone around them about the masters pulling the strings, and how these forces are unstoppable.

The truth of the matter is that we’re the ones ruining everything. All of us are extremely flawed, yet most of us choose to focus on and highlight the flaws of others as opposed to looking inward. As I wrote about at length earlier this year, the greatest impact that 99% of us can have on the world comes from working on ourselves as individuals. Imagine if in the course of such personal work a couple billion people on the planet truly became more decent, conscious people. Don’t you think that would change the world far more than electing another loathsome politician with false promises?

As frustrating and dysfunctional as the current political environment is, we need to remember that we’re still only one year apart from the 2016 election. The clownish “resistance” to Trump rooted in Russia conspiracy fantasies is still very young in the tooth, and I’m optimistic a certain percentage of this group will eventually see the error of their ways and move on. I’m not talking about a majority, but enough to make a difference. There are two things that lead me to this conclusion. First, since I think people are most vulnerable right after a trauma, the low hanging fruits of manipulation have been picked. Second, the argument that Russia is to blame for all that ails us, ignores the existence of the surveillance state, endless imperial wars abroad, a dysfunctional healthcare system, a parasitic financial services industry, etc. The singular focus on blaming Russia for everything as opposed to admitting that our biggest problems are homegrown is as irrational as it isn cynical. It simply doesn’t stand up to any sort of reasonable debate, and will only continue to work on people who desperately want to live a lie in order to feel better.

As Caitlin Johnstone wrote in her excellent piece, Accusing Someone You Disagree With Of Being A Russian Troll Is Admitting You Have No Argument:

There is no legitimate reason to ever accuse a stranger you disagree with of being a Russian agent. Firstly, you cannot possibly know that the stranger you’re dialoguing with works for the Kremlin. Secondly, even in the highly unlikely event that the person you are speaking to really is a secret Russian agent, you should still be able to out-debate them. Kremlin trolls don’t have magical powers. They can’t hypnotize you. If you’re interacting with one they’ll be advancing arguments and ideas just like anyone else, and if your arguments and ideas are defensible you should be able to defend them clearly and articulately.

This is exactly right, and it’s why I don’t think this Russia narrative will continue to exert the societal influence it does today as we move into 2018 and 2019. It’s a psy op which doesn’t stand up to any critical thinking, and a certain percentage of “the resistance” will ultimately move on to more productive behavior. Even if the percentage that discards the Russia obsession is only 5%-10% of the total, this might still equate to millions of people and that’s enough to result in a meaningful change to political dialogue.

Of course, I can’t predict the future and you could easily make the exact opposite argument. I get that, but my overall optimistic vision is based on a lot more than the belief a few card-carrying “resistance” groupies will come to their senses. On a much more global level, I believe the unprecedented connectivity provided to the world via the internet will eventually lead to a much more conscious and healthy environment for human beings on this majestic planet.

People are still grossly underestimating the impact of the internet on human affairs on earth. We remain in inning 1, maybe 2.

— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) November 21, 2017

This will be the main topic of conversation in tomorrow’s piece.

* * *

If you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron, or visit our Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.

#Wealth

0 notes

foursprout-blog · 6 years

Text

The Future Is What We Make Of It - Part 2

New Post has been published on http://foursprout.com/wealth/the-future-is-what-we-make-of-it-part-2/

The Future Is What We Make Of It - Part 2

Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

– From the excellent interview of Masha Gessen via The Atlantic

Also this:

As Caitlin Johnstone wrote in her excellent piece, Accusing Someone You Disagree With Of Being A Russian Troll Is Admitting You Have No Argument:

People are still grossly underestimating the impact of the internet on human affairs on earth. We remain in inning 1, maybe 2.

— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) November 21, 2017

This will be the main topic of conversation in tomorrow’s piece.

* * *

If you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron, or visit our Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.

#Wealth

0 notes

andrebooker7532 · 6 years

Text

7 Tricky Work Situations, and How to Respond to Them

Here is an excerpt from an article written by Alicia Bassuk for Harvard Business Review and the HBR Blog Network. To read the complete article, check out the wealth of free resources, obtain subscription information, and receive HBR email alerts, please click here.

Illustration Credit: Jennifer Maravillas for HBR

* * *

You know the moment: a mood-veering, thought-steering, pressure-packed interaction with a colleague, boss, or client where the right thing to say is stuck in a verbal traffic jam between your brain and your mouth.

Sian Beilock, president of Barnard College and author of Choke, found that this analysis paralysis occurs when your brain suddenly becomes overtaxed by worry or pressure. Consequently, you find yourself unable to respond to a mental, psychological, or emotional challenge, and you fail to execute in the critical moment.

Many people experience this at work. But there are certain phrases you can keep in your back pocket when these moments come. Route your response with them, and redirect the situation to regain control.

[Here are the first two situations.]

Situation #1: Someone takes credit for your idea.

Katie is the COO of a hospitality company. She has a keen strategic mind. In a contentious moment, she recommends that the C-suite move toward a new talent strategy. The idea is met with resistance. Then Dave, the head of IT, restates her idea in his own words. The rest of the C-suite supports him in “his” idea.

It’s not a matter of if this situation happens, but when: You competently make a point. It goes unacknowledged or is tersely rejected. Minutes or days later, a colleague or manager misrepresents your point as their own, restates it identically, and is praised and credited for making it.

What you should say: “Thanks for spotlighting my point.”

Why it works: Spoken with composure, it:

o prevents you from being trivialized by serving notice about the misappropriation of your contribution o allows you to reclaim your idea without aspersion o gives you the upper hand when addressing the matter with a manager o provides an opportunity for greater ownership, if delivered in front of others, by offering detail or clarification for impact

Katie didn’t skip a beat. “Thanks for spotlighting my point, Dave. There are a couple other topics worth considering in tandem with this. I’ll review those quickly and we can delve into more detail in the next meeting.” The group refocused their attention on Katie, and moved along to viewing her as the point person for the conversation.

Situation #2: You’re asked to stay late when you’re about to leave the office for a personal obligation.

Heather is a physician at a large urban hospital. Wednesdays at 4 PM she attends a one-hour clinic administration meeting. If Heather leaves by 5 PM she arrives home in time to allow the nanny to get to her own children’s after-school program on time. At 5 PM, Heather stands up to leave. One of the clinic administrators asks if she can stay a few more minutes until they are done. Heather dreads saying she has to leave to relieve the nanny, because she knows her colleagues may judge her as having a poor work ethic.

What you should say: “Excuse me, I have another commitment.”

Picking up your child from daycare, moving a parent into a care facility, or attending a surgery consultation with a dear friend are time sensitive, must-do things — especially when someone you love is depending on you. No matter how family-friendly a workplace claims to be, explaining family matters to colleagues can cause resentment.

Why it works: This sentence will minimize your risk of backlash because it:

o serves as an implicit, respectable request for confidentiality o establishes an information boundary that puts anyone who crosses it at risk of appearing intrusive o eliminates oversharing about the reason for your departure

Gathering her laptop and bag, Heather said, “Excuse me, I have another commitment.” Another physician asked, “Where are you off to? Anything fun?” Walking toward the conference room door, Heather grabbed her water bottle with the parting phrase, “It’s just something I committed to long before this meeting was scheduled. I’ll swing by tomorrow to get caught up.”

* * *

Here is a direct link to the complete article.

Alicia Bassuk is a leadership designer and coach, motivational speaker, and founder of leadership development firm Ubica. Clients include professional athletes, C-level executives, presidential appointees, entrepreneurs, and other leaders internationally. Follow her on Twitter.

from personivt2c http://employeeengagement.ning.com/xn/detail/1986438:BlogPost:194516 via http://www.rssmix.com/

0 notes

hopefuldreamerpatrol · 6 years

Text

INTERVIEW WITH SARA BUTLER ZALESKY

Today we have Sara Butler Zalesky, Author of her new book “Wheeler” .

Thank you Sara for participating in our interview.

Can you tell us a bit about yourself and how long you have been writing

I didn’t set out to be an author, that’s for certain! I was a dabbler since primary school, and in high school and college, I took several creative writing courses but didn’t do anything with it. My creative outlets have changed over the years, but dreaming up stories has always been there.

Please tell me about your book “Wheeler” and what gave you the idea for this one.

They tell you to write a story what you would want to read, so I did. My passion for cycling and my desire to support women’s cycling specifically, was the impetus for this book.

What sort of research did you do to write this book?

Since the book is about a pro cyclist, I tried to get as much information as I could about the structure of the teams and further depth into how races and strategy work. This way, I would be able to explain the finer points without being overwhelming, but still impart the excitement and drama of racing.

I have also read more Shakespeare than I ever wanted to read, but don’t ask me to quote any lines. I can’t remember any of it.

Valentine’s card with tandem bicycle

Do you outline books ahead of time or are you more of a by-the-seat-of-your-pants writer?

Completely by the seat of my pants, although since I wrote Wheeler using the UCI Women’s Tour calendar, I think having some kind of structure has been a huge help.

How long does it take you to write a book?

I’ve been writing both Wheeler and the follow up since June, 2015. That’s when I accidentally emailed my best a rough draft of Graham and Loren’s first date. I chose the wrong file but he encouraged me to keep going.

Do you have an agent or a publisher, and if you can share, who they are?

I do not have an agent or publisher. A sports romance set in pro cycling has been a tough sell. I stopped sending queries when I got to 117 rejections. And yes, I’ve kept every one.

What are you working on currently / next?

I’m currently working on the follow up to Wheeler, which doesn’t have a title yet. I’m taking suggestions though.

What does a typical workday look like for you?

I’m an indoor cycling instructor and two mornings a week, I roll out of bed at 4:30am to head to the gym and begin warming up for my cycling class. I’m back at home by 6:45ish for the scramble to get my son out of bed, fed and on the school bus by 7:20.

I’m to my full time job by 9. Working in law, there isn’t a day that is the same: I could be drafting pleadings, real estate agreements, transcribing correspondence, but I always have the interruption of answering the telephone. (Insert heavy sigh here) If I have some free time and an idea has been percolating in the back of my mind, I’ll write it down or I’ll do some editing.

Thursday nights, I’m back at the gym for my cycling class but the other evenings I spend with my son and my husband. Once the house is quiet, I sit at the computer and write or edit, but usually both, until I can’t see straight.

What does your writing space look like? (can we see a photo of the space?)

It’s a complete disaster and no, you can’t see it. ☺ I have a Mac, my iPad, a mic for practicing to record the audiobook (pipe dream) and usually a crochet project to help me think. One of my two cats is often lying next to or on the keyboard, blissful in the heat of the lamp.

I have noticed that a lot of authors have a spotify music playlist to work to, do you like writing to music and if so what playlist is your favourite?

I have Spotify here and Pandora and usually have either going while I’m writing. I was listening to a lot of love songs and romantic themed playlists but lately I’ve gravitated to instrumentals. On Pandora the playlist is called “This Will Destroy You Radio” as I created it using the post-rock band, This Will Destroy You. I often post about songs that inspire me on my blog.

What do you do in your free time when you are not writing?

I’m usually out riding my bicycle but I don’t have a whole lot of free time.

Do you have any favourite authors?

Dan Brown, Mercedes Lackey, David Eddings, Michael Crichton, Rick Riordan and of course, JK Rowling.

What books have you read recently?

Sadly, I haven’t picked up someone else’s book since I started writing mine, but the last book I read was The Gate Thief by Orson Scott Card.

What has been one of your most rewarding experiences as an author?

I have met some amazing people in my journey and I cherish the friendships I have made.

What were some of the challenges you faced with your writing and on the road to getting published?

I write too much fluff but I’ve gotten better at identifying it before my editor points it out.

Do you have any wisdom to impart to any aspiring writers?

I have many regrets, far too many, but the number one thing is: Hire an editor. Hire an editor. I cannot stress that enough. There are some fantastic freelance editors out there that won’t cost you an arm and a leg. Editing your story is akin to cutting out your heart and soul and having someone rip it to shreds in front of your eyes. You will cry. You will get angry. You will want to fire off emails laced with profanity. Don’t. Let their words simmer and think about it, then do what they tell you to do.

I wrote a post on my blog called: Things I Wish I Knew Before Self-Publishing which dives into the depth of my angst.

And finally please let our readers know where we can purchase your books.

Wheeler is available on Kindle and paperback through Amazon.com.

Name: Sara Butler Zalesky

Genre: Sports Romance/Women’s Fiction

Bio: Sara has never lacked for imagination, but it wasn’t until the Fates decided to give the string of her life a tug, bringing her romantic leanings together with her passion for the sport of cycling, and Poof! She can call herself a (self)published author.

Sara was born in the wee hours of a November night in New York City. When her family moved to a small borough in northwestern New Jersey, she had little choice but to move as well. Self-sufficiency is a tough thing for a toddler.

The dichotomy of being the middle child of three, but the only girl, was difficult, as typically no one really pays attention to a middle child. Mostly, Sara spent her time creating fanciful stories in her head when she should have been focused on other things, an issue that continues to this day.

Most of these stories have never been shared, let alone completed. This all changed in the spring of 2015, when Sara was encouraged by a friend to expand upon a short story she had accidentally emailed to him. The result is ‘Wheeler’, a romantic, women’s fiction/sport novel, which combines the author’s romantic inclinations and her passion for cycling.

Sara currently resides in the suburbs of Philadelphia, PA, with her loving husband and their son. She is a paralegal for a boutique law firm in Chester County, Pa, an avid road cyclist and indoor cycling instructor at a national chain.

Visit my blog at www.sarabutlerzalesky.com which features posts about the women’s peloton, cycling in general, writing, and some personal tidbits. Readers might even find some clues about who inspired the characters in Wheeler. Follow me on Twitter @sarazalesky for updates on the second book.

Author links:

https://twitter.com/sarazalesky

https://sarabutlerzalesky.com/

https://www.facebook.com/SaraButlerZalesky/

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/15470045.Sara_Butler_Zalesky

Fate whisper to the warrior, ‘You cannot withstand the storm.’ The warrior whispers back, ‘I am the storm.’

Loren Mackenzie has spent much of her life honing her body to overcome the physical challenges of being a professional cyclist in the women’s European peloton. She has also refined the control of her mind, using the power of her emotions in competition to become one of the elite cyclists in the world. An accident at the Philadelphia International Cycling Classic affords Loren opportunity to rise to the challenge of leading her team to victory, but also face the sting of defeat, together.

After a chance meeting with a famous actor, a whirlwind romance develops quickly, and what appears to be the perfect relationship threatens to unravel Loren’s tightly wound life. The microscope of media attention dredges up fears that her tragic past will be unearthed; secrets she has kept buried, even from those closest to her.

As the Women’s World Tour continues with races across Europe, a predator stalks Loren, conspiring not only put her chances at the World Championship in jeopardy but also force her to confront the phantoms haunting her mind.

Can Loren face the trauma of her past and vanquish the demons within, or will betrayal and obsession ultimately defeat her?

FOLLOW ME :… @tfaulc (click links below)

#INTERVIEW – Sara Butler Zalesky, Author of “Wheeler” – @sarazalesky @xpressoreads INTERVIEW WITH SARA BUTLER ZALESKY

#Author Interview #Book Reviews

0 notes

aaljakni · 7 years

Text

A Guide To Getting The Most Out Of Network Marketing

By Johnson Robert

With the ability to advertise, practically anywhere and sell just about anything, network marketing is becoming a huge lure and is beating down the stigma by producing results. If you want to see what all the fuss is about, check out these networking tips and learn how the genre operates and how you can earn from it. It is important to keep track of the money you make in your network marketing strategy. There has to be a point where you choose whether or not to continue if you're not making enough profit to survive on. When that point is can be set before you sign up so you won't have any doubt in your mind if that time comes. Following a strong leader is a great idea in network marketing. If they're able to captain the ship, you just might be able to grow your network from their expertise. Besides, having someone who can guide you through the process is incredibly important to network marketing. It can be a very tricky business. My Father is an entrepreneur and he's taught me a lot over time. One thing I learned just by eating dinner with him is that he claims everything. As long as you discuss your network marketing business at dinner, you can claim not only the bill but your gas costs to and from the restaurant! Leverage you efforts. Network marketing is traditionally about exchanging time for money. If you leverage your time by setting up automated systems to do some of your generic network marketing tasks, you will have more time to network personally, with people deserving of your time, who can actually help your business grow. Study and know your product very well. Being passionate about the product will show when you are marketing it to others. They will see how much you love your product, and the probability will rise that they will join up. The more you know about your product, the more informative and convincing your reviews will be. Work towards a goal of making money in your sleep. Network marketing CAN lead to passive income through your downline. So make your goal to have enough referrals to pay your bills entirely. After you hit that goal, every new referral becomes "gravy", extra money for you to use for fun things like trips. If you are planning to start a network marketing business, you are going to have to treat it as if it is your real brick and mortar business. Many people get into it with the mindset that it is a hobby and if this is your mindset, you are bound to fail. Understand that you are going to get rejected. It's not a commentary on your failure to win them over. There will always be people who are too timid to grasp at the opportunity that is presented. Give them the same amount of time you give any other prospect and then move on. There are plenty of fish in the sea. Expose your business to at least thirty people per day. The focus should be on what gets you paid, which is recruiting and retail. In order to become a successful network marketer, spend at least 2 hours per day on exposing your business to people. If you can do this day in and day out for a year, there is no way to fail at your network marketing business. Choose a network marketing avenue that will best serve your business needs. There are three main ways to get great paid advertising for your site. These are E-zine advertising, pay-per-click marketing, and email marketing. Each has their own advantages, and can even be used in tandem, to increase your web presence.

About the Author:

By investing enough time and effort into lead best lead generation, you can make sure that your business is properly situated for future growth. If you neglect lead generation, on the other hand, your business will suffer. Do not let this happen to you. Use the tips you have read to generate new leads.

from Blogger http://ift.tt/2wXyvM5 via A Guide To Getting The Most Out Of Network Marketing

0 notes

marie85marketing · 7 years

Text

Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them)

It’s taken you more than 10 hours to write a blog post.

You’ve researched the topic to the nth degree. You’ve edited it to within an inch of its life.

Now it’s time to get it out into the world!

You excitedly press Publish, and … even days later … crickets.

Heartbreaking, right?

We all like to think that the amount of effort we invest in creating a piece of content directly correlates to how deeply it resonates with readers. But, experience has repeatedly shown this is not the case.

So, what’s the deciding factor if it’s not effort?

Luck? Timing? Skill?

Yes, the factors above do play a part. But, more often than not, it comes down to these two elements:

If your content doesn’t hook readers in the first few sentences, it doesn’t matter how good the rest of it is, you’ve lost them.

If you don’t clearly communicate your idea, readers may lose interest after your introduction because they don’t have an incentive to keep reading.

So, how do we write both a strong hook and a strong idea? That’s what I’m going to break down for you today.

What’s a hook?

A hook is a narrative technique that operates exactly as it sounds.

It’s information so interesting that it hooks the reader’s attention, and they feel compelled to see what comes next. So, they keep reading.

The hook works in tandem with the headline; the headline delivers the reader to the first lines of an article, and then the hook in those first few lines launches the reader deeper into the piece of content.

What’s the idea?

The dictionary definition of an “idea” is:

“A thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action.”

That neatly sums up what we’re trying to do when we write anything. We want to share a thought, make a suggestion and/or inspire people to take a certain action.

Why is your content’s idea so crucial?

Because your idea drives the payoff the reader will get from continuing to read your article.

That payoff can be:

Laughing from your humor

Learning new information

Taking meaningful action that will help them reach their goals

The idea forms the backbone of your article that leads to a positive outcome for both you and your readers.

We all dream of making such an impact on people that they share our ideas far and wide.

If the people reading your words aren’t inspired to share them with their friends, there’s a ceiling on the number of people you can reach.

Where things can go wrong for your idea

It might be easy to think of an idea for a piece of content, but when we actually sit down to write:

We discover we don’t have as much to say about the idea as we first thought.

We start writing about one idea, but then introduce another halfway through.

In both of these situations, if we publish that content, the reader may be left feeling either bewildered or cheated at the end. Not ideal.

How do you get super clear on your idea?

My favorite technique is to initially write a very literal headline.

Why?

Because it forces you to identify the exact promise you’re making to the reader.

If you can’t identify your promise, then you’re not going to be able to deliver a payoff.

Once you’ve written your literal headline and confirmed you know the exact idea you want to communicate, you’ll use that to:

Determine whether you actually have enough material to deliver a payoff for the reader.

Edit tightly to ensure you do so.

Here are three examples of literal headlines that sum up the article’s payoff.

We’re not burnt out because we’re busy; it’s because our emotional bandwidth has been completely tapped.

You don’t usually say “thank you” in these seven situations. Here’s why you should.

If you’re a man who wants kids but doesn’t want to stay home with them every day, you’d better value your wife more.

When you click through to each of the posts above, you’ll see the actual headline is different from the literal headline I’ve identified.

That’s because your headline needs to hook the reader’s interest without giving away the payoff. If you deliver the payoff in the headline, there’s generally no need for someone to read the whole article.

Struggling to write a literal headline? That means you don’t have a good handle on the idea you’re trying to communicate.

Here are three examples of categories that can help you craft a strong idea … and then we’ll get into writing your hook.

1. Counterintuitive

This is where you take conventional wisdom and turn it upside down.

We all know a balanced diet made up of a variety of foods is ideal, so when someone tells us they ate nothing but potatoes for a year and lost a large amount of weight along the way, that gets our attention.

2. Practical and actionable

Telling people “If you’re organized, your life will be so much easier” is yawn-worthy. Everyone knows that.

Showing them the way you organize your life so that they can learn your tips? That’s far more powerful.

3. Contrarian

When everyone’s telling us not to do a certain thing, having someone tell us we should is incredibly refreshing.

It’s also the kind of thing we tend to share because it’s “ammunition” that justifies our choice to take a path less travelled.

How to write a great hook

One of the most common things I do as an editor is delete the first two paragraphs of articles sent to me.

Introductions are difficult to write, but:

If you’ve written 400+ words of an introduction, there’s a solid chance there’s a decent hook sitting somewhere around the 200-word mark.

Remember, your hook doesn’t need to be the most interesting thing anyone’s ever read; it just needs to be interesting enough to keep the person reading.

Here are five of my favorite hook techniques, with examples:

Hook #1: Ask a question

Humans are drawn to questions for a few reasons. One reason is that we’re inherently competitive.

When someone asks us a question, we’re compelled to first answer it and then find out if our answer is correct. If you don’t have an answer to a question, but someone suggests they do, that’s an even stronger hook.

Here’s an example of Sonia Simone leveraging this:

Headline: The #1 Conversion Killer in Your Copy (and How to Beat It)

Hook: What makes people almost buy? What makes them get most of the way there and then drop out of your shopping cart at the last second?

If you have a website with a shopping cart, I defy you to stop reading the article after those first two lines.

Hook #2: Focus on the reader

This is probably the easiest hook to create. By using the words “You,” “You’re” or “Your” in your introduction, you directly address the reader.

Take this example from Alexandra Franzen:

Headline: This one’s for you

Hook: Your inbox is full of ego-rattling rejection emails, but you’re emailing 10 more literary agents today. … Your podcast has exactly three fans (and two are your parents), but you’re posting a new episode every single week, nonetheless.

The reason this hook works so well is because the reader now feels they’re part of the article’s story. This creates a strong need to know how that story ends.

Hook #3: Add dialogue

Who likes listening in on other people’s conversations?

We all do. We can’t help it. When an article starts with dialogue, we’re quickly hooked because we’re getting all the pleasure of eavesdropping, without the guilt.

Here’s an example from Jerod Morris:

Headline: Why Your Greatest Asset May Be Slowly Eroding (and How You Can Rebuild It)

Hook: “Why are we sending this email to this list again?” Kim asked. I was incredulous. “Umm, because we never sent it a first time,” I thought to myself. Still, before responding, I decided to check. Glad I did.

This hook combines both spoken and inner dialogue. The latter of which is next-level intriguing because it gives the reader access to the writer’s inner thoughts.

Why was Jerod “glad he checked?” We have to know.

Hook #4: Make a big statement

This is where a writer makes a “big call” — usually in both their headline and their opening line. It’s effective because it makes people think, “Really? What have you got to back that up?”

It’s a favorite technique of Penelope Trunk:

Headline: Living up to your potential is BS

Hook: The idea that we somehow have a certain amount of potential that we must live up to is a complete crock.

The reason this hook is so effective is because it captures the attention of people from both sides of the argument.

People who agree with the sentiment want to find out why they’re “right” in thinking so. People who disagree? They read on because they want to rebut.

Big statements are not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t want to engage in robust conversation about the ideas you’ve expressed in a post, stay away from this one.

Hook #5: Tell a story

If you present information in a story format, people immediately pay attention. Using a story as a hook, however, is a pro skill.

You can’t kick off with just any story; it has to be relevant. For an ongoing master class in this technique, simply follow Bernadette Jiwa.

Here’s a recent example from her blog:

Headline: The Unchanging Nature Of Business

Hook: It’s a cool November day in 2014, and a young couple pause on a suburban street to snap a selfie with an iPhone 5C.

Why does the above statement hook you? Because you want to discover the link between the headline and a young couple taking a selfie.

Let’s recap

I’ve covered a bit of ground, so let’s touch on the key points again.

If you don’t hook readers at the beginning of your article, they’re more likely to move on to a different piece of content.

If you can’t summarize the idea of your article in a “literal” headline, then you don’t have a firm grasp of what you’re trying to communicate — and you’ll fail to deliver a payoff for the reader.

Where to go from here?

A simple exercise I urge you to do regularly is: pay attention to the articles that you read all the way to the end and share.

Study them by identifying:

The hooks the author used to get you reading.

The hooks the author used to keep you reading. (For example, subheadings also function as hooks.)

The underlying ideas. (Write literal headlines once you’ve identified those ideas.)

What moved you to share those articles?

When you understand the writing techniques that work well on you, you can use them in your own writing to ensure that if you put a lot of time and energy into creating a piece of content, then it will get the attention it deserves.

The post Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them) appeared first on Copyblogger.

0 notes

hypertagmaster · 7 years

Text

Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them)

It’s taken you more than 10 hours to write a blog post.

You’ve researched the topic to the nth degree. You’ve edited it to within an inch of its life.

Now it’s time to get it out into the world!

You excitedly press Publish, and … even days later … crickets.

Heartbreaking, right?

So, what’s the deciding factor if it’s not effort?

Luck? Timing? Skill?

Yes, the factors above do play a part. But, more often than not, it comes down to these two elements:

If your content doesn’t hook readers in the first few sentences, it doesn’t matter how good the rest of it is, you’ve lost them.

If you don’t clearly communicate your idea, readers may lose interest after your introduction because they don’t have an incentive to keep reading.

So, how do we write both a strong hook and a strong idea? That’s what I’m going to break down for you today.

What’s a hook?

A hook is a narrative technique that operates exactly as it sounds.

It’s information so interesting that it hooks the reader’s attention, and they feel compelled to see what comes next. So, they keep reading.

What’s the idea?

The dictionary definition of an “idea” is:

“A thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action.”

That neatly sums up what we’re trying to do when we write anything. We want to share a thought, make a suggestion and/or inspire people to take a certain action.

Why is your content’s idea so crucial?

Because your idea drives the payoff the reader will get from continuing to read your article.

That payoff can be:

Laughing from your humor

Learning new information

Taking meaningful action that will help them reach their goals

The idea forms the backbone of your article that leads to a positive outcome for both you and your readers.

We all dream of making such an impact on people that they share our ideas far and wide.

If the people reading your words aren’t inspired to share them with their friends, there’s a ceiling on the number of people you can reach.

Where things can go wrong for your idea

It might be easy to think of an idea for a piece of content, but when we actually sit down to write:

We discover we don’t have as much to say about the idea as we first thought.

We start writing about one idea, but then introduce another halfway through.

In both of these situations, if we publish that content, the reader may be left feeling either bewildered or cheated at the end. Not ideal.

How do you get super clear on your idea?

My favorite technique is to initially write a very literal headline.

Why?

Because it forces you to identify the exact promise you’re making to the reader.

If you can’t identify your promise, then you’re not going to be able to deliver a payoff.

Once you’ve written your literal headline and confirmed you know the exact idea you want to communicate, you’ll use that to:

Determine whether you actually have enough material to deliver a payoff for the reader.

Edit tightly to ensure you do so.

Here are three examples of literal headlines that sum up the article’s payoff.

We’re not burnt out because we’re busy; it’s because our emotional bandwidth has been completely tapped.

You don’t usually say “thank you” in these seven situations. Here’s why you should.

If you’re a man who wants kids but doesn’t want to stay home with them every day, you’d better value your wife more.

When you click through to each of the posts above, you’ll see the actual headline is different from the literal headline I’ve identified.

Struggling to write a literal headline? That means you don’t have a good handle on the idea you’re trying to communicate.

Here are three examples of categories that can help you craft a strong idea … and then we’ll get into writing your hook.

1. Counterintuitive

This is where you take conventional wisdom and turn it upside down.

2. Practical and actionable

Telling people “If you’re organized, your life will be so much easier” is yawn-worthy. Everyone knows that.

Showing them the way you organize your life so that they can learn your tips? That’s far more powerful.

3. Contrarian

When everyone’s telling us not to do a certain thing, having someone tell us we should is incredibly refreshing.

It’s also the kind of thing we tend to share because it’s “ammunition” that justifies our choice to take a path less travelled.

How to write a great hook

One of the most common things I do as an editor is delete the first two paragraphs of articles sent to me.

Introductions are difficult to write, but:

If you’ve written 400+ words of an introduction, there’s a solid chance there’s a decent hook sitting somewhere around the 200-word mark.

Remember, your hook doesn’t need to be the most interesting thing anyone’s ever read; it just needs to be interesting enough to keep the person reading.

Here are five of my favorite hook techniques, with examples:

Hook #1: Ask a question

Humans are drawn to questions for a few reasons. One reason is that we’re inherently competitive.

Here’s an example of Sonia Simone leveraging this:

Headline: The #1 Conversion Killer in Your Copy (and How to Beat It)

Hook: What makes people almost buy? What makes them get most of the way there and then drop out of your shopping cart at the last second?

If you have a website with a shopping cart, I defy you to stop reading the article after those first two lines.

Hook #2: Focus on the reader

This is probably the easiest hook to create. By using the words “You,” “You’re” or “Your” in your introduction, you directly address the reader.

Take this example from Alexandra Franzen:

Headline: This one’s for you

The reason this hook works so well is because the reader now feels they’re part of the article’s story. This creates a strong need to know how that story ends.

Hook #3: Add dialogue

Who likes listening in on other people’s conversations?

We all do. We can’t help it. When an article starts with dialogue, we’re quickly hooked because we’re getting all the pleasure of eavesdropping, without the guilt.

Here’s an example from Jerod Morris:

Headline: Why Your Greatest Asset May Be Slowly Eroding (and How You Can Rebuild It)

This hook combines both spoken and inner dialogue. The latter of which is next-level intriguing because it gives the reader access to the writer’s inner thoughts.

Why was Jerod “glad he checked?” We have to know.

Hook #4: Make a big statement

It’s a favorite technique of Penelope Trunk:

Headline: Living up to your potential is BS

Hook: The idea that we somehow have a certain amount of potential that we must live up to is a complete crock.

The reason this hook is so effective is because it captures the attention of people from both sides of the argument.

People who agree with the sentiment want to find out why they’re “right” in thinking so. People who disagree? They read on because they want to rebut.

Big statements are not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t want to engage in robust conversation about the ideas you’ve expressed in a post, stay away from this one.

Hook #5: Tell a story

If you present information in a story format, people immediately pay attention. Using a story as a hook, however, is a pro skill.

You can’t kick off with just any story; it has to be relevant. For an ongoing master class in this technique, simply follow Bernadette Jiwa.

Here’s a recent example from her blog:

Headline: The Unchanging Nature Of Business

Hook: It’s a cool November day in 2014, and a young couple pause on a suburban street to snap a selfie with an iPhone 5C.

Why does the above statement hook you? Because you want to discover the link between the headline and a young couple taking a selfie.

Let’s recap

I’ve covered a bit of ground, so let’s touch on the key points again.

If you don’t hook readers at the beginning of your article, they’re more likely to move on to a different piece of content.

Where to go from here?

A simple exercise I urge you to do regularly is: pay attention to the articles that you read all the way to the end and share.

Study them by identifying:

The hooks the author used to get you reading.

The hooks the author used to keep you reading. (For example, subheadings also function as hooks.)

The underlying ideas. (Write literal headlines once you’ve identified those ideas.)

What moved you to share those articles?

The post Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them) appeared first on Copyblogger.

via marketing http://ift.tt/2kUV4e8

#IFTTT #marketing

0 notes

layralannister · 7 years

Text

Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them)

It’s taken you more than 10 hours to write a blog post.

You’ve researched the topic to the nth degree. You’ve edited it to within an inch of its life.

Now it’s time to get it out into the world!

You excitedly press Publish, and … even days later … crickets.

Heartbreaking, right?

So, what’s the deciding factor if it’s not effort?

Luck? Timing? Skill?

Yes, the factors above do play a part. But, more often than not, it comes down to these two elements:

If your content doesn’t hook readers in the first few sentences, it doesn’t matter how good the rest of it is, you’ve lost them.

If you don’t clearly communicate your idea, readers may lose interest after your introduction because they don’t have an incentive to keep reading.

So, how do we write both a strong hook and a strong idea? That’s what I’m going to break down for you today.

What’s a hook?

A hook is a narrative technique that operates exactly as it sounds.

It’s information so interesting that it hooks the reader’s attention, and they feel compelled to see what comes next. So, they keep reading.

What’s the idea?

The dictionary definition of an “idea” is:

“A thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action.”

That neatly sums up what we’re trying to do when we write anything. We want to share a thought, make a suggestion and/or inspire people to take a certain action.

Why is your content’s idea so crucial?

Because your idea drives the payoff the reader will get from continuing to read your article.

That payoff can be:

Laughing from your humor

Learning new information

Taking meaningful action that will help them reach their goals

The idea forms the backbone of your article that leads to a positive outcome for both you and your readers.

We all dream of making such an impact on people that they share our ideas far and wide.

If the people reading your words aren’t inspired to share them with their friends, there’s a ceiling on the number of people you can reach.

Where things can go wrong for your idea

It might be easy to think of an idea for a piece of content, but when we actually sit down to write:

We discover we don’t have as much to say about the idea as we first thought.

We start writing about one idea, but then introduce another halfway through.

In both of these situations, if we publish that content, the reader may be left feeling either bewildered or cheated at the end. Not ideal.

How do you get super clear on your idea?

My favorite technique is to initially write a very literal headline.

Why?

Because it forces you to identify the exact promise you’re making to the reader.

If you can’t identify your promise, then you’re not going to be able to deliver a payoff.

Once you’ve written your literal headline and confirmed you know the exact idea you want to communicate, you’ll use that to:

Determine whether you actually have enough material to deliver a payoff for the reader.

Edit tightly to ensure you do so.

Here are three examples of literal headlines that sum up the article’s payoff.

We’re not burnt out because we’re busy; it’s because our emotional bandwidth has been completely tapped.

You don’t usually say “thank you” in these seven situations. Here’s why you should.

If you’re a man who wants kids but doesn’t want to stay home with them every day, you’d better value your wife more.

When you click through to each of the posts above, you’ll see the actual headline is different from the literal headline I’ve identified.

Struggling to write a literal headline? That means you don’t have a good handle on the idea you’re trying to communicate.

Here are three examples of categories that can help you craft a strong idea … and then we’ll get into writing your hook.

1. Counterintuitive

This is where you take conventional wisdom and turn it upside down.

2. Practical and actionable

Telling people “If you’re organized, your life will be so much easier” is yawn-worthy. Everyone knows that.

Showing them the way you organize your life so that they can learn your tips? That’s far more powerful.

3. Contrarian

When everyone’s telling us not to do a certain thing, having someone tell us we should is incredibly refreshing.

It’s also the kind of thing we tend to share because it’s “ammunition” that justifies our choice to take a path less travelled.

How to write a great hook

One of the most common things I do as an editor is delete the first two paragraphs of articles sent to me.

Introductions are difficult to write, but:

If you’ve written 400+ words of an introduction, there’s a solid chance there’s a decent hook sitting somewhere around the 200-word mark.

Remember, your hook doesn’t need to be the most interesting thing anyone’s ever read; it just needs to be interesting enough to keep the person reading.

Here are five of my favorite hook techniques, with examples:

Hook #1: Ask a question

Humans are drawn to questions for a few reasons. One reason is that we’re inherently competitive.

Here’s an example of Sonia Simone leveraging this:

Headline: The #1 Conversion Killer in Your Copy (and How to Beat It)

Hook: What makes people almost buy? What makes them get most of the way there and then drop out of your shopping cart at the last second?

If you have a website with a shopping cart, I defy you to stop reading the article after those first two lines.

Hook #2: Focus on the reader

This is probably the easiest hook to create. By using the words “You,” “You’re” or “Your” in your introduction, you directly address the reader.

Take this example from Alexandra Franzen:

Headline: This one’s for you

The reason this hook works so well is because the reader now feels they’re part of the article’s story. This creates a strong need to know how that story ends.

Hook #3: Add dialogue

Who likes listening in on other people’s conversations?

We all do. We can’t help it. When an article starts with dialogue, we’re quickly hooked because we’re getting all the pleasure of eavesdropping, without the guilt.

Here’s an example from Jerod Morris:

Headline: Why Your Greatest Asset May Be Slowly Eroding (and How You Can Rebuild It)

This hook combines both spoken and inner dialogue. The latter of which is next-level intriguing because it gives the reader access to the writer’s inner thoughts.

Why was Jerod “glad he checked?” We have to know.

Hook #4: Make a big statement

It’s a favorite technique of Penelope Trunk:

Headline: Living up to your potential is BS

Hook: The idea that we somehow have a certain amount of potential that we must live up to is a complete crock.

The reason this hook is so effective is because it captures the attention of people from both sides of the argument.

People who agree with the sentiment want to find out why they’re “right” in thinking so. People who disagree? They read on because they want to rebut.

Big statements are not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t want to engage in robust conversation about the ideas you’ve expressed in a post, stay away from this one.

Hook #5: Tell a story

If you present information in a story format, people immediately pay attention. Using a story as a hook, however, is a pro skill.

You can’t kick off with just any story; it has to be relevant. For an ongoing master class in this technique, simply follow Bernadette Jiwa.

Here’s a recent example from her blog:

Headline: The Unchanging Nature Of Business

Hook: It’s a cool November day in 2014, and a young couple pause on a suburban street to snap a selfie with an iPhone 5C.

Why does the above statement hook you? Because you want to discover the link between the headline and a young couple taking a selfie.

Let’s recap

I’ve covered a bit of ground, so let’s touch on the key points again.

If you don’t hook readers at the beginning of your article, they’re more likely to move on to a different piece of content.

Where to go from here?

A simple exercise I urge you to do regularly is: pay attention to the articles that you read all the way to the end and share.

Study them by identifying:

The hooks the author used to get you reading.

The hooks the author used to keep you reading. (For example, subheadings also function as hooks.)

The underlying ideas. (Write literal headlines once you’ve identified those ideas.)

What moved you to share those articles?

The post Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them) appeared first on Copyblogger.

from Local SEO http://ift.tt/2kUV4e8 via Local SEO

#Local SEO

0 notes

nathandgibsca · 7 years

Text

Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them)

It’s taken you more than 10 hours to write a blog post.

You’ve researched the topic to the nth degree. You’ve edited it to within an inch of its life.

Now it’s time to get it out into the world!

You excitedly press Publish, and … even days later … crickets.

Heartbreaking, right?

So, what’s the deciding factor if it’s not effort?

Luck? Timing? Skill?

Yes, the factors above do play a part. But, more often than not, it comes down to these two elements:

If your content doesn’t hook readers in the first few sentences, it doesn’t matter how good the rest of it is, you’ve lost them.

If you don’t clearly communicate your idea, readers may lose interest after your introduction because they don’t have an incentive to keep reading.

So, how do we write both a strong hook and a strong idea? That’s what I’m going to break down for you today.

What’s a hook?

A hook is a narrative technique that operates exactly as it sounds.

It’s information so interesting that it hooks the reader’s attention, and they feel compelled to see what comes next. So, they keep reading.

What’s the idea?

The dictionary definition of an “idea” is:

“A thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action.”

That neatly sums up what we’re trying to do when we write anything. We want to share a thought, make a suggestion and/or inspire people to take a certain action.

Why is your content’s idea so crucial?

Because your idea drives the payoff the reader will get from continuing to read your article.

That payoff can be:

Laughing from your humor

Learning new information

Taking meaningful action that will help them reach their goals

The idea forms the backbone of your article that leads to a positive outcome for both you and your readers.

We all dream of making such an impact on people that they share our ideas far and wide.

If the people reading your words aren’t inspired to share them with their friends, there’s a ceiling on the number of people you can reach.

Where things can go wrong for your idea

It might be easy to think of an idea for a piece of content, but when we actually sit down to write:

We discover we don’t have as much to say about the idea as we first thought.

We start writing about one idea, but then introduce another halfway through.

In both of these situations, if we publish that content, the reader may be left feeling either bewildered or cheated at the end. Not ideal.

How do you get super clear on your idea?

My favorite technique is to initially write a very literal headline.

Why?

Because it forces you to identify the exact promise you’re making to the reader.

If you can’t identify your promise, then you’re not going to be able to deliver a payoff.

Once you’ve written your literal headline and confirmed you know the exact idea you want to communicate, you’ll use that to:

Determine whether you actually have enough material to deliver a payoff for the reader.

Edit tightly to ensure you do so.

Here are three examples of literal headlines that sum up the article’s payoff.

We’re not burnt out because we’re busy; it’s because our emotional bandwidth has been completely tapped.

You don’t usually say “thank you” in these seven situations. Here’s why you should.

If you’re a man who wants kids but doesn’t want to stay home with them every day, you’d better value your wife more.

When you click through to each of the posts above, you’ll see the actual headline is different from the literal headline I’ve identified.

Struggling to write a literal headline? That means you don’t have a good handle on the idea you’re trying to communicate.

Here are three examples of categories that can help you craft a strong idea … and then we’ll get into writing your hook.

1. Counterintuitive

This is where you take conventional wisdom and turn it upside down.

2. Practical and actionable

Telling people “If you’re organized, your life will be so much easier” is yawn-worthy. Everyone knows that.

Showing them the way you organize your life so that they can learn your tips? That’s far more powerful.

3. Contrarian

When everyone’s telling us not to do a certain thing, having someone tell us we should is incredibly refreshing.

It’s also the kind of thing we tend to share because it’s “ammunition” that justifies our choice to take a path less travelled.

How to write a great hook

One of the most common things I do as an editor is delete the first two paragraphs of articles sent to me.

Introductions are difficult to write, but:

If you’ve written 400+ words of an introduction, there’s a solid chance there’s a decent hook sitting somewhere around the 200-word mark.

Remember, your hook doesn’t need to be the most interesting thing anyone’s ever read; it just needs to be interesting enough to keep the person reading.

Here are five of my favorite hook techniques, with examples:

Hook #1: Ask a question

Humans are drawn to questions for a few reasons. One reason is that we’re inherently competitive.

Here’s an example of Sonia Simone leveraging this:

Headline: The #1 Conversion Killer in Your Copy (and How to Beat It)

Hook: What makes people almost buy? What makes them get most of the way there and then drop out of your shopping cart at the last second?

If you have a website with a shopping cart, I defy you to stop reading the article after those first two lines.

Hook #2: Focus on the reader

This is probably the easiest hook to create. By using the words “You,” “You’re” or “Your” in your introduction, you directly address the reader.

Take this example from Alexandra Franzen:

Headline: This one’s for you

The reason this hook works so well is because the reader now feels they’re part of the article’s story. This creates a strong need to know how that story ends.

Hook #3: Add dialogue

Who likes listening in on other people’s conversations?

We all do. We can’t help it. When an article starts with dialogue, we’re quickly hooked because we’re getting all the pleasure of eavesdropping, without the guilt.

Here’s an example from Jerod Morris:

Headline: Why Your Greatest Asset May Be Slowly Eroding (and How You Can Rebuild It)

This hook combines both spoken and inner dialogue. The latter of which is next-level intriguing because it gives the reader access to the writer’s inner thoughts.

Why was Jerod “glad he checked?” We have to know.

Hook #4: Make a big statement

It’s a favorite technique of Penelope Trunk:

Headline: Living up to your potential is BS

Hook: The idea that we somehow have a certain amount of potential that we must live up to is a complete crock.

The reason this hook is so effective is because it captures the attention of people from both sides of the argument.

People who agree with the sentiment want to find out why they’re “right” in thinking so. People who disagree? They read on because they want to rebut.

Big statements are not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t want to engage in robust conversation about the ideas you’ve expressed in a post, stay away from this one.

Hook #5: Tell a story

If you present information in a story format, people immediately pay attention. Using a story as a hook, however, is a pro skill.

You can’t kick off with just any story; it has to be relevant. For an ongoing master class in this technique, simply follow Bernadette Jiwa.

Here’s a recent example from her blog:

Headline: The Unchanging Nature Of Business

Hook: It’s a cool November day in 2014, and a young couple pause on a suburban street to snap a selfie with an iPhone 5C.

Why does the above statement hook you? Because you want to discover the link between the headline and a young couple taking a selfie.

Let’s recap

I’ve covered a bit of ground, so let’s touch on the key points again.

If you don’t hook readers at the beginning of your article, they’re more likely to move on to a different piece of content.

Where to go from here?

A simple exercise I urge you to do regularly is: pay attention to the articles that you read all the way to the end and share.

Study them by identifying:

The hooks the author used to get you reading.

The hooks the author used to keep you reading. (For example, subheadings also function as hooks.)

The underlying ideas. (Write literal headlines once you’ve identified those ideas.)

What moved you to share those articles?

The post Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them) appeared first on Copyblogger.

from SEO Tips http://feeds.copyblogger.com/~/273333786/0/copyblogger~Two-Vital-Elements-that-Might-Be-Missing-from-Your-Content-and-Precisely-Where-to-Add-Them/

0 notes

soph28collins · 7 years

Text

Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them)

It’s taken you more than 10 hours to write a blog post.

You’ve researched the topic to the nth degree. You’ve edited it to within an inch of its life.

Now it’s time to get it out into the world!

You excitedly press Publish, and … even days later … crickets.

Heartbreaking, right?

So, what’s the deciding factor if it’s not effort?

Luck? Timing? Skill?

Yes, the factors above do play a part. But, more often than not, it comes down to these two elements:

If your content doesn’t hook readers in the first few sentences, it doesn’t matter how good the rest of it is, you’ve lost them.

If you don’t clearly communicate your idea, readers may lose interest after your introduction because they don’t have an incentive to keep reading.

So, how do we write both a strong hook and a strong idea? That’s what I’m going to break down for you today.

What’s a hook?

A hook is a narrative technique that operates exactly as it sounds.

It’s information so interesting that it hooks the reader’s attention, and they feel compelled to see what comes next. So, they keep reading.

What’s the idea?

The dictionary definition of an “idea” is:

“A thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action.”

That neatly sums up what we’re trying to do when we write anything. We want to share a thought, make a suggestion and/or inspire people to take a certain action.

Why is your content’s idea so crucial?

Because your idea drives the payoff the reader will get from continuing to read your article.

That payoff can be:

Laughing from your humor

Learning new information

Taking meaningful action that will help them reach their goals

The idea forms the backbone of your article that leads to a positive outcome for both you and your readers.

We all dream of making such an impact on people that they share our ideas far and wide.

If the people reading your words aren’t inspired to share them with their friends, there’s a ceiling on the number of people you can reach.

Where things can go wrong for your idea

It might be easy to think of an idea for a piece of content, but when we actually sit down to write:

We discover we don’t have as much to say about the idea as we first thought.

We start writing about one idea, but then introduce another halfway through.

In both of these situations, if we publish that content, the reader may be left feeling either bewildered or cheated at the end. Not ideal.

How do you get super clear on your idea?

My favorite technique is to initially write a very literal headline.

Why?

Because it forces you to identify the exact promise you’re making to the reader.

If you can’t identify your promise, then you’re not going to be able to deliver a payoff.

Once you’ve written your literal headline and confirmed you know the exact idea you want to communicate, you’ll use that to:

Determine whether you actually have enough material to deliver a payoff for the reader.

Edit tightly to ensure you do so.

Here are three examples of literal headlines that sum up the article’s payoff.

We’re not burnt out because we’re busy; it’s because our emotional bandwidth has been completely tapped.

You don’t usually say “thank you” in these seven situations. Here’s why you should.

If you’re a man who wants kids but doesn’t want to stay home with them every day, you’d better value your wife more.

When you click through to each of the posts above, you’ll see the actual headline is different from the literal headline I’ve identified.

Struggling to write a literal headline? That means you don’t have a good handle on the idea you’re trying to communicate.

Here are three examples of categories that can help you craft a strong idea … and then we’ll get into writing your hook.

1. Counterintuitive

This is where you take conventional wisdom and turn it upside down.

2. Practical and actionable

Telling people “If you’re organized, your life will be so much easier” is yawn-worthy. Everyone knows that.

Showing them the way you organize your life so that they can learn your tips? That’s far more powerful.

3. Contrarian

When everyone’s telling us not to do a certain thing, having someone tell us we should is incredibly refreshing.

It’s also the kind of thing we tend to share because it’s “ammunition” that justifies our choice to take a path less travelled.

How to write a great hook

One of the most common things I do as an editor is delete the first two paragraphs of articles sent to me.

Introductions are difficult to write, but:

If you’ve written 400+ words of an introduction, there’s a solid chance there’s a decent hook sitting somewhere around the 200-word mark.

Remember, your hook doesn’t need to be the most interesting thing anyone’s ever read; it just needs to be interesting enough to keep the person reading.

Here are five of my favorite hook techniques, with examples:

Hook #1: Ask a question

Humans are drawn to questions for a few reasons. One reason is that we’re inherently competitive.

Here’s an example of Sonia Simone leveraging this:

Headline: The #1 Conversion Killer in Your Copy (and How to Beat It)

Hook: What makes people almost buy? What makes them get most of the way there and then drop out of your shopping cart at the last second?

If you have a website with a shopping cart, I defy you to stop reading the article after those first two lines.

Hook #2: Focus on the reader

This is probably the easiest hook to create. By using the words “You,” “You’re” or “Your” in your introduction, you directly address the reader.

Take this example from Alexandra Franzen:

Headline: This one’s for you

The reason this hook works so well is because the reader now feels they’re part of the article’s story. This creates a strong need to know how that story ends.

Hook #3: Add dialogue

Who likes listening in on other people’s conversations?

We all do. We can’t help it. When an article starts with dialogue, we’re quickly hooked because we’re getting all the pleasure of eavesdropping, without the guilt.

Here’s an example from Jerod Morris:

Headline: Why Your Greatest Asset May Be Slowly Eroding (and How You Can Rebuild It)

This hook combines both spoken and inner dialogue. The latter of which is next-level intriguing because it gives the reader access to the writer’s inner thoughts.

Why was Jerod “glad he checked?” We have to know.

Hook #4: Make a big statement

It’s a favorite technique of Penelope Trunk:

Headline: Living up to your potential is BS

Hook: The idea that we somehow have a certain amount of potential that we must live up to is a complete crock.

The reason this hook is so effective is because it captures the attention of people from both sides of the argument.

People who agree with the sentiment want to find out why they’re “right” in thinking so. People who disagree? They read on because they want to rebut.

Big statements are not for the faint-hearted. If you don’t want to engage in robust conversation about the ideas you’ve expressed in a post, stay away from this one.

Hook #5: Tell a story

If you present information in a story format, people immediately pay attention. Using a story as a hook, however, is a pro skill.

You can’t kick off with just any story; it has to be relevant. For an ongoing master class in this technique, simply follow Bernadette Jiwa.

Here’s a recent example from her blog:

Headline: The Unchanging Nature Of Business

Hook: It’s a cool November day in 2014, and a young couple pause on a suburban street to snap a selfie with an iPhone 5C.

Why does the above statement hook you? Because you want to discover the link between the headline and a young couple taking a selfie.

Let’s recap

I’ve covered a bit of ground, so let’s touch on the key points again.

If you don’t hook readers at the beginning of your article, they’re more likely to move on to a different piece of content.

Where to go from here?

A simple exercise I urge you to do regularly is: pay attention to the articles that you read all the way to the end and share.

Study them by identifying:

The hooks the author used to get you reading.

The hooks the author used to keep you reading. (For example, subheadings also function as hooks.)

The underlying ideas. (Write literal headlines once you’ve identified those ideas.)

What moved you to share those articles?

The post Two Vital Elements that Might Be Missing from Your Content (and Precisely Where to Add Them) appeared first on Copyblogger.

from Copyblogger http://www.copyblogger.com/hook-and-idea/

0 notes